From - Thu Aug 21 08:43:00 1997 >From smsmith@cybertrails.com Wed Aug 20 09:55:35 1997 Received: from 6 ([205.180.50.87]) by cliff.cybertrails.com (Netscape Mail Server v2.02) with ESMTP id AAM148; Wed, 20 Aug 1997 09:49:49 -0700 From: smsmith@cybertrails.com (S. Michele Smith) To: Cc: "Baha'i SRB Moderators" Subject: Re: censorship - moderators (fwd) Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 09:21:48 -0500 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <19970820164927117.AAM148@6> X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 1712 Dear Mr. Glaysher, Thank you for your submission to soc.religion.bahai. I am returning it to you unposted as this thread was discontinued yesterday. Thank you for your participation. Sincerely, S. Michele Smith co-moderator soc.religion.bahai ---------- From: FG To: srb@bcca.org Cc: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: censorship - moderators (fwd) Date: Wednesday, August 20, 1997 8:49 AM Earle, AC wrote: > > I've read many of the posts in this thread and find them > consistently negative and inharmonious. As I discovered years ago, > percieved injustice should ignored. If , in fact, it is unjust, then > God and Baha'u'llah will take care of it in the most just manner > possible. The key is to trust God an Baha'u'llah implicitly. The > negativity of this entire thread, the bickering amongst ourselves, is > something we all ought to be ashamed of. If we, as Baha'is, can not be > unified, how can we teach others the principle to others? We do what is > within our power and lead by example. Leave injustice to the One who is > best equipped to deal with it. Why then do the Bahai institutions concern themselves with the injustices perpetrated against the Iranian Bahais? Following your reasoning, why not leave that up to God? Abdu'l-Bahai says somewhere we should be concerned about the issues of our time. If injustice and censorship are a few of them, it stands to reason we should not look the other way, pretending they don't exist. -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Thu Aug 21 08:43:02 1997 >From smsmith@cybertrails.com Wed Aug 20 09:55:36 1997 Received: from 6 ([205.180.50.87]) by cliff.cybertrails.com (Netscape Mail Server v2.02) with ESMTP id AAN148; Wed, 20 Aug 1997 09:49:51 -0700 From: smsmith@cybertrails.com (S. Michele Smith) To: Cc: "Baha'i SRB Moderators" Subject: Re: censorship - moderators (fwd) Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 09:25:30 -0500 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <19970820164927117.AAN148@6> X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 8552 Dear Mr. Glaysher, Thank you for your submission to soc.religion.bahai. I am returning it to you unposted as this thread was discontinued yesterday. Thank you for your participation. Sincerely, S. Michele Smith co-moderator soc.religion.bahai ---------- From: FG To: srb@bcca.org Cc: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: censorship - moderators (fwd) Date: Wednesday, August 20, 1997 9:20 AM Mac0000013 wrote: [clip] > Greetings; > > Whoever this F. Glaysher is, he makes some assumptions which appear not to > be proven. > > He appears to claim, without evidence, that there is censorship in > regards to talk.religion.bahai ---- he then claims that the majority of > the Baha'i's are intolerant, as when he claims that "...both were crushed > by the intolerant Baha'i majority." I and others have posted numerous censored messages to alt.religion.bahai as evidence. They may be found on www.dejanews.com by searching for "SRB Censored" from January 1, 1997 to the present under talk.religion.bahai and alt.religion.bahai. Well over 30 other people have stated they have been censored and their messages too may be found on www.dejanews.com. In terms of an "intolerant Bahai majority," I am clearly referring to the 691 majority who voted NO for an unmoderated talk.religion.bahai--in clear excess of what usually takes place on UseNet where technical NO votes are the only legitimate ones.... > > Before addressing some other issues, if I remember correctly, the > moderators have explained the policy of the newsgroup. If one wishes to > engage in the flame wars, the catcalling, the ad homin. attacks far too > prevalent in other newsgroups, then one's posting is returned with a > comment as to where one may wish to employ some degree of courtesy. One > is then free to resubmit the posting: a posting that should be on topic, > address the issues, and not make personal attacks. This neglects that many people have stated their posts were innocuous and relevant to discussion. An umoderated Big 8 newsgroup on the Bahai Faith would provide a place where people can discuss it with confidence that no one is suppressing their opinions. Soc.religion.bahai has lost its credibility for good reasons. > > ALSO, I believe that there was this particular individual quite loudly > declaring that there was "trouble in RiverCity" and demanding a vote be > taken. The vote was taken. The proposal was defeated: I believe that > under two hundred voted for it and more than five or six hundred voted > against it... Rather than abide by the decision and accept the outcome, > within a short time, a newsgroup was formed by this same person. All of the above is based on misperception and misunderstanding of the UseNet voting guidelines. First of all it's an interest poll. If 100+ people are interested in forming a newsgroup, they should be allowed to do so on any topic they choose. No ideological reasons are valid. NO votes should only be cast for technical reasons, i.e., the proposed group is in the wrong hierarchy of UseNet, which was not a problem with talk.religion.bahai, it was definitely in the right one, the talk.* hierarchy. I did not form alt.religion.bahai. A member of the UseNet Volunteer Votetakers did. I believe he did because he perceived the manifest injustice of what Bahais did.... > > Perhaps I am mistaken by there was a vote, the vote went against the > person, and the person then implemented a Newsgroup meeting the parameters > of his particular wishes and that Newsgroup was not, to my limited > knowledge, opposed by any one of the establishment. Alt.religion.bahai does not meet the parameters of what 157 YES votes wanted: a Big 8 unmoderated newsgroup, open and highly accessible by all.... > > And now this individual claims that there is censorship when he is still > touting his statements publicly upon his own little Newsgroup and in this > newsgroup? I am not the only person making that claim. I am surprised, somewhat, that you and others are still claiming that to be the case. Please read the record via www.dejanews.com where you'll find many people saying so.... > > At the same time this person now claims that 157 people were suppressed > --- not, I hope, as has been done in Cambodia, or in parts of South > America---- and he now claims that there was fraud but in re-reading that > particular post I was unable to read of any specific evidence documenting > such an assertion. Using www.dejanews.com you can find many postings under "NO vote campaign" that I believe will document my accusation of voter fraud.... > > With all due respect to all concerned, it would appear that this > particular individual is demanding that everyone halt all activities and > heed his declarations, his opinions and accord him wondrous status of > knowledge and that we accept his statement of censorship (self-defined) > and fraud and intolerance. You, like others, continue to attempt to present me as an isolated, aberrant individual with an unjust axe to grind. I believe that is tantamount to character assassination and very old and tiresome strategem for anyone who has followed the discussion all along these several months. I am not alone in believing censorship exists on soc.religion.bahai. Why do you and others continue to insist otherwise? > > I must apologize that I haven't been in his particular country for as many > years as he has, nor do I have the bounty of his vast education and > attainments, HOWEVER, many of the Baha'i's I have met in this country and > others have not been intolerant nor do they claim others are when a vote > goes against them. I find it interesting that the moderators permit you to sarcastically attack and insult me in very personal terms but routinely reject much milder posts from myself and other Bahais and non-Bahais. I believe it is unfair and inconsistent of them and that they owe me an apology, as you do, and the decency of this response.... I respond above to the "intolerant" allegation. > > Over the years I have met many Baha'i's who strive to submerge the ego > that they might serve others... for some it is an easier contest than for > others. Few wish to be so embroiled in battles and contests as to have > little energy for personal transformation that will help their > communities. THUS, I find myself at a loss to understand the statement > that, even in this alleged instance, so many Baha'i's were intolerant --- > as defined by F. Glaysher within the parameters of a proposal being > defeated. Again, with all respect, you are ignoring what UseNet voting guidelines are and that they were ignored and abused by many Bahais.... Instead, you are in the above passage, I believe, blaming the victim of injustice and censorship and you seem to be intimating I'm a megalomaniac in the maw of my ego.... Unfair, I believe. > > I lack the vast experience F. Glaysher must have so I can not make the > comments he has regarding others, but perhaps we might all practice > something I learned from two wonderful Baha'i ladies in Columbus, Ohio ( > Olivia Kelsey and Emily Chavez ) who stated that if I managed to keep my > mouth shut and my eyes open and my ears attentive, then perhaps I might > learn something --- and especially, learn how good others are. Your opening sentence seems quite derisive to me. The rest of the passage is irrelevant to the censorship issue. > > There is not a day that goes by that I surely could take that injunction > to heart more and more: and especially when trying to learn some of the > foundations of patience and courtesy and submerging ego to serve others so > I might learn something of the Baha'i Faith. Does the Bahai Faith support, stand for, and encourage censorship? That is the question.... Many have said YES. Many have experienced it. The first vote for talk.religion.bahai proved for most fair-minded observers. The next vote approaches come late September. You and other Bahais will have the opportunity once again to live up to the high ideals of the Bahai Writings on liberty and freedom of religious conscience.... -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Wed Aug 20 11:16:57 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Wed Aug 20 07:29:58 1997 Received: (qmail 7401 invoked from network); 20 Aug 1997 14:29:57 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.119) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 20 Aug 1997 14:29:57 -0000 Message-ID: <33FAFFCA.4EB4@hotmail.com> Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 10:31:38 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: soc.religion.bahai CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: censorship - moderators (fwd) References: <"EXhaVD.A.JKF.1Ue-z"@bounty> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 1483 Rowe, Thomas wrote: > [clip] > I'm one of those misguided folks who voted "no" based on my > understanding of the issues. My understanding could have been faulty > and/or my logic for the vote could have been wrong. Nevertheless, I > don't apologize for my vote. It was not an attempt to censor free > discussion despite what any of the 157 positive voters may think. > Notice it became a non-issue when another avenue for an unmoderated > discussion list on the Baha'i Faith came into being (sorry - don't have > the address on the top of my head). It's not a "non-issue." Alt.religion.bahai is on an obscure poorly available alt.* hierarchy which has not allowed many of the 157 YES voters even to participate.... If you now recognize you voted for the wrong reasons, I would think you wouldn't mind admitting it and apologizing to those who definitely have been hurt by your actions.... [clip] > Tom Rowe trowe@uwsp.edu > ********************************************************** > They say that ignorance and apathy are the two great evils of > today's world. Well, I wouldn't know about that and I don't > care anyway. > ********************************************************** > https://www.uwsp.edu/acad/psych/tr/home1.htm -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Wed Aug 20 11:16:55 1997 >From news@lacy.zippo.com Wed Aug 20 07:30:01 1997 Received: (from news@localhost) by lacy.zippo.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id HAA05969; Wed, 20 Aug 1997 07:29:54 -0700 (PDT) To: srb@bcca.org Path: newsp.zippo.com!news1 From: FG Newsgroups: soc.religion.bahai Subject: Re: censorship - moderators (fwd) Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 10:31:38 -0400 Organization: None Lines: 39 Message-ID: <33FAFFCA.4EB4@hotmail.com> References: <"EXhaVD.A.JKF.1Ue-z"@bounty> Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com NNTP-Posting-Host: glaysher@199.179.42.119 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) CC: FG@hotmail.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 1483 Rowe, Thomas wrote: > [clip] > I'm one of those misguided folks who voted "no" based on my > understanding of the issues. My understanding could have been faulty > and/or my logic for the vote could have been wrong. Nevertheless, I > don't apologize for my vote. It was not an attempt to censor free > discussion despite what any of the 157 positive voters may think. > Notice it became a non-issue when another avenue for an unmoderated > discussion list on the Baha'i Faith came into being (sorry - don't have > the address on the top of my head). It's not a "non-issue." Alt.religion.bahai is on an obscure poorly available alt.* hierarchy which has not allowed many of the 157 YES voters even to participate.... If you now recognize you voted for the wrong reasons, I would think you wouldn't mind admitting it and apologizing to those who definitely have been hurt by your actions.... [clip] > Tom Rowe trowe@uwsp.edu > ********************************************************** > They say that ignorance and apathy are the two great evils of > today's world. Well, I wouldn't know about that and I don't > care anyway. > ********************************************************** > https://www.uwsp.edu/acad/psych/tr/home1.htm -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Thu Aug 21 08:42:59 1997 >From smsmith@cybertrails.com Wed Aug 20 09:55:43 1997 Received: from 6 ([205.180.50.87]) by cliff.cybertrails.com (Netscape Mail Server v2.02) with ESMTP id AAR148; Wed, 20 Aug 1997 09:49:58 -0700 From: smsmith@cybertrails.com (S. Michele Smith) To: Cc: "Baha'i SRB Moderators" Subject: Re: censorship - moderators (fwd) Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 09:32:11 -0500 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <19970820164927117.AAR148@6> X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 1943 Dear Mr. Glaysher, Thank you for your submission to soc.religion.bahai. I am returning it to you unposted as this thread was discontinued yesterday. Thank you for your participation. Sincerely, S. Michele Smith co-moderator soc.religion.bahai ---------- From: FG To: srb@bcca.org Cc: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: censorship - moderators (fwd) Date: Wednesday, August 20, 1997 9:31 AM Rowe, Thomas wrote: > [clip] > I'm one of those misguided folks who voted "no" based on my > understanding of the issues. My understanding could have been faulty > and/or my logic for the vote could have been wrong. Nevertheless, I > don't apologize for my vote. It was not an attempt to censor free > discussion despite what any of the 157 positive voters may think. > Notice it became a non-issue when another avenue for an unmoderated > discussion list on the Baha'i Faith came into being (sorry - don't have > the address on the top of my head). It's not a "non-issue." Alt.religion.bahai is on an obscure poorly available alt.* hierarchy which has not allowed many of the 157 YES voters even to participate.... If you now recognize you voted for the wrong reasons, I would think you wouldn't mind admitting it and apologizing to those who definitely have been hurt by your actions.... [clip] > Tom Rowe trowe@uwsp.edu > ********************************************************** > They say that ignorance and apathy are the two great evils of > today's world. Well, I wouldn't know about that and I don't > care anyway. > ********************************************************** > https://www.uwsp.edu/acad/psych/tr/home1.htm -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Thu Aug 21 08:43:04 1997 >From smsmith@cybertrails.com Wed Aug 20 09:55:46 1997 Received: from 6 ([205.180.50.87]) by cliff.cybertrails.com (Netscape Mail Server v2.02) with ESMTP id AAT148; Wed, 20 Aug 1997 09:50:01 -0700 From: smsmith@cybertrails.com (S. Michele Smith) To: Cc: "Baha'i SRB Moderators" Subject: Re: censorship - moderators (fwd) Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 09:43:48 -0500 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Message-ID: <19970820164927117.AAT148@6> X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 3730 Dear Mr. Glaysher, As you are aware, this thread has been cut. The reasons for this are due to the fact that it is not moving forward, no new ground is being covered, accusations are being thrown around, and hard feelings are everywhere. It is pointless to continue a discussion that has degenerated into a blame-game and leaves no room for feelings of unity and understanding. This particular discussion may well be revisited again in a few months. Perhaps then, when feelings are calmer and people have time to gather new and positive information on this topic, further postings will be considered. Sincerely, S. Michele Smith co-moderator soc.religion.bahai ---------- From: FG To: srb@bcca.org Cc: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: censorship - moderators (fwd) Date: Wednesday, August 20, 1997 9:49 AM Tricia Hague-Blackford wrote: > > [Moderator's note: This is the last submission that will be accepted on the > thread regarding censorship. Thank you for your understanding.] > > I too have found this topic to be most disruptive. > I would like to see this topic dropped. > > I have tried to see both sides of this consultation, but it seems that > while everyone is looking at the negative side of things, that is all they > will get in return. To be successful in anything at all, whether it be > teaching or working in whatever profession, its important to focus on the > positive side of things. Should the world have ignored Hitler and concentrated on the positive? The above reasoning makes no sense in my opinion. If an injustice has been done, widely thought so by many people, it's not going away by pretending it didn't happen.... Indeed, it is incumbent upon those who care about justice and the Bahai Faith to confront even the unpleasant realities in order to defend both. You are also neglecting, I believe, that when an evil is perpetrated, it must be confronted in order for it not to continue over and over and over.... Somethings don't go away just because we don't like them.... > > What we sow, we shall also reap..... Censorship, lies, deceit, deception, equivocation, and half-truths can only breed further unpalatable crops.... > > What we reap, we shall also sow...... a different way of looking at things > for sure, but think about it a minute or five... It's a truism which needs > to be given some thought methinks. ;-) I believe you're ignoring the "negativism," it seems, of 691 Bahais violating the rights of 157 people who wanted a free and open newsgroup that they could have trust and confidence in.... > > `Abdu'l-Bahá talks about this in His Writings, and I think if we continue > to be negative about such matters, nothing good will come from it. Abdu'l-Baha talks about many things in his writings. Can you quote a passage that justifies censorship and persecution of others for their beliefs? I see your insistence on anyone saying anything about what actually happened as quite naive and innocent. I mean you no insult by that. You raise a serious point of view but one that is flawed by the seriousness of what it neglects to take into account. > > Tricia > > THE MOST PATHETIC PERSON IN THE WORLD IS THE PERSON WHO HAS SIGHT, BUT NO > VISION... > Helen Keller (Blind, Deaf and Mute) I believe you're also failing to see the spectacle of the moderators cutting off all discussion on this topic as they state they're going to above.... [clip] -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. ---------- From - Wed Aug 20 11:17:04 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Wed Aug 20 07:49:09 1997 Received: (qmail 7511 invoked from network); 20 Aug 1997 14:47:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.119) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 20 Aug 1997 14:47:30 -0000 Message-ID: <33FB03E6.6B4A@hotmail.com> Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 10:49:10 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: soc.religion.bahai CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: censorship - moderators (fwd) References: <"lA_ANB.A.DpB.w-k-z"@bounty> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 2898 Tricia Hague-Blackford wrote: > = > [Moderator's note: This is the last submission that will be accepted on= the > thread regarding censorship. Thank you for your understanding.] > = > I too have found this topic to be most disruptive. > I would like to see this topic dropped. > = > I have tried to see both sides of this consultation, but it seems that > while everyone is looking at the negative side of things, that is all t= hey > will get in return. To be successful in anything at all, whether it be= > teaching or working in whatever profession, its important to focus on t= he > positive side of things. Should the world have ignored Hitler and concentrated on the positive? The above reasoning makes no sense in my opinion. If an injustice has been done, widely thought so by many people, it's not going away by pretending it didn't happen.... Indeed, it is incumbent upon those = who care about justice and the Bahai Faith to confront even the unpleasant realities in order to defend both. You are also neglecting, I believe, that when an evil is perpetrated, it must be confronted in order for = it not to continue over and over and over.... = Somethings don't go away just because we don't like them.... > = > What we sow, we shall also reap..... Censorship, lies, deceit, deception, equivocation, and half-truths can only breed further unpalatable crops.... > = > What we reap, we shall also sow...... a different way of looking at th= ings > for sure, but think about it a minute or five... It's a truism which n= eeds > to be given some thought methinks. ;-) I believe you're ignoring the "negativism," it seems, of 691 Bahais violating the rights of 157 people who wanted a free and open newsgroup that they could have trust and confidence in.... > = > `Abdu'l-Bah=E1 talks about this in His Writings, and I think if we cont= inue > to be negative about such matters, nothing good will come from it. Abdu'l-Baha talks about many things in his writings. Can you quote a passage that justifies censorship and persecution of others for their beliefs? I see your insistence on anyone saying anything about what actually happened as quite naive and innocent. I mean you no insult by that. You raise a serious point of view but one that is flawed by the seriousness of what it neglects to take into account. > = > Tricia > = > THE MOST PATHETIC PERSON IN THE WORLD IS THE PERSON WHO HAS SIGHT, BUT = NO > VISION... > Helen Keller (Blind, Deaf and Mute) I believe you're also failing to see the spectacle of the moderators cutting off all discussion on this topic as they state they're going to above.... [clip] -- = Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on = www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Wed Aug 20 11:17:06 1997 >From news@lacy.zippo.com Wed Aug 20 07:47:28 1997 Received: (from news@localhost) by lacy.zippo.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id HAA06496; Wed, 20 Aug 1997 07:47:25 -0700 (PDT) To: srb@bcca.org Path: newsp.zippo.com!news1 From: FG Newsgroups: soc.religion.bahai Subject: Re: censorship - moderators (fwd) Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 10:49:10 -0400 Organization: None Lines: 96 Message-ID: <33FB03E6.6B4A@hotmail.com> References: <"lA_ANB.A.DpB.w-k-z"@bounty> Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com NNTP-Posting-Host: glaysher@199.179.42.119 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) CC: FG@hotmail.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 2898 Tricia Hague-Blackford wrote: > = > [Moderator's note: This is the last submission that will be accepted on= the > thread regarding censorship. Thank you for your understanding.] > = > I too have found this topic to be most disruptive. > I would like to see this topic dropped. > = > I have tried to see both sides of this consultation, but it seems that > while everyone is looking at the negative side of things, that is all t= hey > will get in return. To be successful in anything at all, whether it be= > teaching or working in whatever profession, its important to focus on t= he > positive side of things. Should the world have ignored Hitler and concentrated on the positive? The above reasoning makes no sense in my opinion. If an injustice has been done, widely thought so by many people, it's not going away by pretending it didn't happen.... Indeed, it is incumbent upon those = who care about justice and the Bahai Faith to confront even the unpleasant realities in order to defend both. You are also neglecting, I believe, that when an evil is perpetrated, it must be confronted in order for = it not to continue over and over and over.... = Somethings don't go away just because we don't like them.... > = > What we sow, we shall also reap..... Censorship, lies, deceit, deception, equivocation, and half-truths can only breed further unpalatable crops.... > = > What we reap, we shall also sow...... a different way of looking at th= ings > for sure, but think about it a minute or five... It's a truism which n= eeds > to be given some thought methinks. ;-) I believe you're ignoring the "negativism," it seems, of 691 Bahais violating the rights of 157 people who wanted a free and open newsgroup that they could have trust and confidence in.... > = > `Abdu'l-Bah=E1 talks about this in His Writings, and I think if we cont= inue > to be negative about such matters, nothing good will come from it. Abdu'l-Baha talks about many things in his writings. Can you quote a passage that justifies censorship and persecution of others for their beliefs? I see your insistence on anyone saying anything about what actually happened as quite naive and innocent. I mean you no insult by that. You raise a serious point of view but one that is flawed by the seriousness of what it neglects to take into account. > = > Tricia > = > THE MOST PATHETIC PERSON IN THE WORLD IS THE PERSON WHO HAS SIGHT, BUT = NO > VISION... > Helen Keller (Blind, Deaf and Mute) I believe you're also failing to see the spectacle of the moderators cutting off all discussion on this topic as they state they're going to above.... [clip] -- = Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on = www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Thu Aug 21 09:44:52 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Thu Aug 21 06:12:22 1997 Received: (qmail 15990 invoked from network); 21 Aug 1997 13:12:21 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.121) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 21 Aug 1997 13:12:21 -0000 Message-ID: <33FC3F1E.1600@hotmail.com> Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 09:14:06 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Earle, AC Subject: Re: censorship - moderators (fwd) References: <"OVpSvC.A.-UE.Lkd-z"@bounty> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 937 See followup on alt.religion.bahai since it has been censored by srb.... Earle, AC wrote: > > I've read many of the posts in this thread and find them > consistently negative and inharmonious. As I discovered years ago, > percieved injustice should ignored. If , in fact, it is unjust, then > God and Baha'u'llah will take care of it in the most just manner > possible. The key is to trust God an Baha'u'llah implicitly. The > negativity of this entire thread, the bickering amongst ourselves, is > something we all ought to be ashamed of. If we, as Baha'is, can not be > unified, how can we teach others the principle to others? We do what is > within our power and lead by example. Leave injustice to the One who is > best equipped to deal with it. -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Thu Aug 21 09:44:54 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Thu Aug 21 06:14:47 1997 Received: (qmail 16000 invoked from network); 21 Aug 1997 13:13:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.121) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 21 Aug 1997 13:13:08 -0000 Message-ID: <33FC3F4D.57E0@hotmail.com> Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 09:14:53 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mac0000013 Subject: Re: censorship - moderators (fwd) References: <"M4A2tD.A._CF.CQe-z"@bounty> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 6591 See followup on alt.religion.bahai since it has been censored by srb.... Mac0000013 wrote: > > August 19, 1997 > 0030 hrs > > Here is an abbreviated copy of the communication to which I am > replying.... My comments follow abbreviated copy of post... > > [To the readership of SRB: It should be noted that ARB was not created by > any certain individual and ARB or any alt.* group can be created without > any vote at all. the moderator.] > > *************************************** > Subject: Re: censorship - moderators (fwd) > From: FG > Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 11:07:56 -0500 > Message-ID: <"tXGqKC.A.jvG.yOJ-z"@bounty> > > F. Glaysher: > > > Talk.religion.bahai was unfairly defeated in my > > > opinion by an abuse of the voting guidelines > > > generally acceptable on UseNet. > **************************** > > B. Limber: Yeah, right. > ***************************** > F. Glaysher: > I believe I wrote the passage above. To brush off an > injustice, especially one involving voter abuse and > perhaps fraud, seems highly alarming to me.... Bahais, > I thought, were supposed to respect and appreciate the > sanctity of casting ballots, not abuse them, as was > done to suppress 157 people who voted YES for an > unmoderated newsgroup. > ********************************************** > > B. Limber: > And if the vote had turned out the other way, I wonder if the > > individual who posted this would now be saying Talk.religion.bahai > > was unfairly passed." > ******************************************** > F. Glaysher: > This statement is completely illogical to me and > lacks any sense of the gravity of the issue.... > ************************************. > > B. Limber: > > UseNet, while a very useful tool, is a neutral entity and takes no > > "stance" one way or the other. > ************************************** > F. Glaysher: > False. UseNet, through it's administration and voluntary > vote takers, strives to make the Internet an equable place > for people around the world of all opinions. UseNet does > not support the kind of censorship that took place in > regard to talk.religion.bahai.... > > > > This is how I see it too. Unfortunately, both were crushed > > > by the intolerant Bahai majority. > > ********************************************** > Greetings; > > Whoever this F. Glaysher is, he makes some assumptions which appear not to > be proven. > > He appears to claim, without evidence, that there is censorship in > regards to talk.religion.bahai ---- he then claims that the majority of > the Baha'i's are intolerant, as when he claims that "...both were crushed > by the intolerant Baha'i majority." > > Before addressing some other issues, if I remember correctly, the > moderators have explained the policy of the newsgroup. If one wishes to > engage in the flame wars, the catcalling, the ad homin. attacks far too > prevalent in other newsgroups, then one's posting is returned with a > comment as to where one may wish to employ some degree of courtesy. One > is then free to resubmit the posting: a posting that should be on topic, > address the issues, and not make personal attacks. > > ALSO, I believe that there was this particular individual quite loudly > declaring that there was "trouble in RiverCity" and demanding a vote be > taken. The vote was taken. The proposal was defeated: I believe that > under two hundred voted for it and more than five or six hundred voted > against it... Rather than abide by the decision and accept the outcome, > within a short time, a newsgroup was formed by this same person. > > Perhaps I am mistaken by there was a vote, the vote went against the > person, and the person then implemented a Newsgroup meeting the parameters > of his particular wishes and that Newsgroup was not, to my limited > knowledge, opposed by any one of the establishment. > > And now this individual claims that there is censorship when he is still > touting his statements publicly upon his own little Newsgroup and in this > newsgroup? > > At the same time this person now claims that 157 people were suppressed > --- not, I hope, as has been done in Cambodia, or in parts of South > America---- and he now claims that there was fraud but in re-reading that > particular post I was unable to read of any specific evidence documenting > such an assertion. > > With all due respect to all concerned, it would appear that this > particular individual is demanding that everyone halt all activities and > heed his declarations, his opinions and accord him wondrous status of > knowledge and that we accept his statement of censorship (self-defined) > and fraud and intolerance. > > I must apologize that I haven't been in his particular country for as many > years as he has, nor do I have the bounty of his vast education and > attainments, HOWEVER, many of the Baha'i's I have met in this country and > others have not been intolerant nor do they claim others are when a vote > goes against them. > > Over the years I have met many Baha'i's who strive to submerge the ego > that they might serve others... for some it is an easier contest than for > others. Few wish to be so embroiled in battles and contests as to have > little energy for personal transformation that will help their > communities. THUS, I find myself at a loss to understand the statement > that, even in this alleged instance, so many Baha'i's were intolerant --- > as defined by F. Glaysher within the parameters of a proposal being > defeated. > > I lack the vast experience F. Glaysher must have so I can not make the > comments he has regarding others, but perhaps we might all practice > something I learned from two wonderful Baha'i ladies in Columbus, Ohio ( > Olivia Kelsey and Emily Chavez ) who stated that if I managed to keep my > mouth shut and my eyes open and my ears attentive, then perhaps I might > learn something --- and especially, learn how good others are. > > There is not a day that goes by that I surely could take that injunction > to heart more and more: and especially when trying to learn some of the > foundations of patience and courtesy and submerging ego to serve others so > I might learn something of the Baha'i Faith. -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Thu Aug 21 09:44:56 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Thu Aug 21 06:13:36 1997 Received: (qmail 16007 invoked from network); 21 Aug 1997 13:13:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.121) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 21 Aug 1997 13:13:34 -0000 Message-ID: <33FC3F67.58FC@hotmail.com> Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 09:15:19 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Rowe, Thomas Subject: Re: censorship - moderators (fwd) References: <"EXhaVD.A.JKF.1Ue-z"@bounty> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 1994 See followup on alt.religion.bahai since it has been censored by srb.... Rowe, Thomas wrote: > > Frederick Glaysher wrote: > > An interesting new twist. Victimize 157 people, depriving them > > of their right to express on a major Big 8 hierarchy their > > own beliefs freely and then accuse them of backbiting when > > they further state their opinions about not liking it.... > > > > > It was "heavy-handed" voting that resulted in the "suppression of > > > expression" for 157 people. > > [snip] > > Okay, "time out." I don't like the tone of these posts. I remember the > discussion of the issue of voting for/against the formation of the > newsgroup. There were some hard feelings then by several people and > that has obviously carried over. > > I'm one of those misguided folks who voted "no" based on my > understanding of the issues. My understanding could have been faulty > and/or my logic for the vote could have been wrong. Nevertheless, I > don't apologize for my vote. It was not an attempt to censor free > discussion despite what any of the 157 positive voters may think. > Notice it became a non-issue when another avenue for an unmoderated > discussion list on the Baha'i Faith came into being (sorry - don't have > the address on the top of my head). > > It really doesn't help matters much to impugn the motives of either the > winning or losing side of any electoral issue. > > Tom Rowe trowe@uwsp.edu > ********************************************************** > They say that ignorance and apathy are the two great evils of > today's world. Well, I wouldn't know about that and I don't > care anyway. > ********************************************************** > https://www.uwsp.edu/acad/psych/tr/home1.htm -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Thu Aug 21 09:44:58 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Thu Aug 21 06:14:12 1997 Received: (qmail 16018 invoked from network); 21 Aug 1997 13:14:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.121) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 21 Aug 1997 13:14:10 -0000 Message-ID: <33FC3F8B.6EE0@hotmail.com> Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 09:15:55 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Tricia Hague-Blackford Subject: Re: censorship - moderators (fwd) References: <"lA_ANB.A.DpB.w-k-z"@bounty> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 2372 See followup on alt.religion.bahai since it has been censored by srb.... Tricia Hague-Blackford wrote: > = > [Moderator's note: This is the last submission that will be accepted on= the > thread regarding censorship. Thank you for your understanding.] > = > I too have found this topic to be most disruptive. > I would like to see this topic dropped. > = > I have tried to see both sides of this consultation, but it seems that > while everyone is looking at the negative side of things, that is all t= hey > will get in return. To be successful in anything at all, whether it be= > teaching or working in whatever profession, its important to focus on t= he > positive side of things. > = > What we sow, we shall also reap..... > = > What we reap, we shall also sow...... a different way of looking at th= ings > for sure, but think about it a minute or five... It's a truism which n= eeds > to be given some thought methinks. ;-) > = > `Abdu'l-Bah=E1 talks about this in His Writings, and I think if we cont= inue > to be negative about such matters, nothing good will come from it. > = > Tricia > = > THE MOST PATHETIC PERSON IN THE WORLD IS THE PERSON WHO HAS SIGHT, BUT = NO > VISION... > Helen Keller (Blind, Deaf and Mute) > = > -----Original Message----- > From: Earle [SMTP:Earle] > Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 1997 3:36 AM > To: bahai-faith@bcca.org > Subject: RE: censorship - moderators (fwd) > = > I've read many of the posts in this thread and find them > consistently negative and inharmonious. As I discovered years ago, > percieved injustice should ignored. If , in fact, it is unjust, then > God and Baha'u'llah will take care of it in the most just manner > possible. The key is to trust God an Baha'u'llah implicitly. The > negativity of this entire thread, the bickering amongst ourselves, is > something we all ought to be ashamed of. If we, as Baha'is, can not be= > unified, how can we teach others the principle to others? We do what i= s > within our power and lead by example. Leave injustice to the One who i= s > best equipped to deal with it. > = > ---------- -- = Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on = www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Fri Aug 22 07:07:48 1997 >From trowe@uwsp.edu Thu Aug 21 09:06:55 1997 Received: by ems3.uwsp.edu with Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49) id ; Thu, 21 Aug 1997 11:06:48 -0500 Message-ID: From: "Rowe, Thomas" To: "'FG@hotmail.com'" Subject: RE: censorship - moderators (fwd) Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 11:06:36 -0500 X-Priority: 3 Return-Receipt-To: "Rowe, Thomas" MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.0.1458.49) Content-Type: text/plain X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 2411 Allah'u'Abha, Fred. Since I don't real alt.religion.bahai, perhaps you could forward the followup to me? Thanks. > ---------- > From: FG[SMTP:FG@hotmail.com] > Reply To: FG@hotmail.com > Sent: Thursday, August 21, 1997 8:15 AM > To: Rowe; Rowe, Thomas > Subject: Re: censorship - moderators (fwd) > > See followup on alt.religion.bahai since > it has been censored by srb.... > > > Rowe, Thomas wrote: > > > > Frederick Glaysher wrote: > > > An interesting new twist. Victimize 157 people, depriving them > > > of their right to express on a major Big 8 hierarchy their > > > own beliefs freely and then accuse them of backbiting when > > > they further state their opinions about not liking it.... > > > > > > > It was "heavy-handed" voting that resulted in the > "suppression of > > > > expression" for 157 people. > > > > [snip] > > > > Okay, "time out." I don't like the tone of these posts. I remember > the > > discussion of the issue of voting for/against the formation of the > > newsgroup. There were some hard feelings then by several people and > > that has obviously carried over. > > > > I'm one of those misguided folks who voted "no" based on my > > understanding of the issues. My understanding could have been > faulty > > and/or my logic for the vote could have been wrong. Nevertheless, I > > don't apologize for my vote. It was not an attempt to censor free > > discussion despite what any of the 157 positive voters may think. > > Notice it became a non-issue when another avenue for an unmoderated > > discussion list on the Baha'i Faith came into being (sorry - don't > have > > the address on the top of my head). > > > > It really doesn't help matters much to impugn the motives of either > the > > winning or losing side of any electoral issue. > > > > Tom Rowe > trowe@uwsp.edu > > ********************************************************** > > They say that ignorance and apathy are the two great evils of > > today's world. Well, I wouldn't know about that and I don't > > care anyway. > > ********************************************************** > > https://www.uwsp.edu/acad/psych/tr/home1.htm > > -- > Frederick Glaysher > UseNet: alt.religion.bahai > Ask your ISP to add it; also available on > www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. > From - Wed Aug 13 08:42:29 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Wed Aug 13 05:29:17 1997 Received: (qmail 7735 invoked from network); 13 Aug 1997 12:29:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.119) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 13 Aug 1997 12:29:15 -0000 Message-ID: <33F1A8FF.4069@hotmail.com> Date: Wed, 13 Aug 1997 08:30:55 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc,soc.rights.human,soc.culture.iranian,soc.culture.israel,news-ad min.censorship,news.admin.net-abuse,news.admin.misc,news.admin.net-misc,news.admin.misc.us enet CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Censorship on soc.religion.bahai & the approaching next vote for talk.religion.bahai Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 5735 I'm posting this censored message to your newsgroup because there has been long and continued experience and allegations of censorship by myself and others on soc.religion.bahai All three of the reasons given below are bogus, in my opinion. This message does address the crucial existence of censorship in the Bahai Faith; it adds to and states ideas not found in the other three messages (by my count); AND please someone point out to me WHERE in my message there is "abusive language." A NO vote campaign was orchestrated to defeat an umoderated newsgroup, talk.religion.bahai, in late March 1997. Since there have already been intimations that a similar NO vote will be marshalled against the 157 people who voted YES last time I hope you'll take a few minutes to look at this message and the censorship that is taking place on UseNet. ------------- Subject: Re: censorship - moderators Date: Wed, 13 Aug 1997 02:14:21 -0600 From: "Rick Boatright" Organization: Topeka Business Computers To: Frederick Glaysher , FG@hotmail.com, CC: srb-mods@bcca.org Frederick. This one is coming back to you. It's your fifth message tonight on the same subject saying the same thing. I let you accuse Dick and myself of being liers, censors, I let you accuse us of being unwilling to listen to suggestion and being hopelessly inconsistant. But just for the record, I am returning this one on the following grounds: 1) Does not address the beliefs and teachings of the Baha'i Faith 2) Repetative, does not move the discussion forward, fifth message tonight by the poster on the same subject. 3) abusive language Rick Boatright co-moderator soc.religion.bahai ------CENSORED MESSAGE FOLLOWS------ > To: srb@bcca.org > From: FG > Subject: Re: censorship - moderators > Date: Tue, 12 Aug 1997 08:35:10 -0400 > Organization: None > Reply-to: FG@hotmail.com > Cc: FG@hotmail.com > dmcadam wrote: > > > > [Note: Followups should address the Baha'i Faith. -- Mods] > > > > In answer to your last message : > > > > Dear friend- > > > > I can only speak from an individual point of view as a long time > > Baha'i and my experience is that most folks today simply cannot > > handle a wide open, no holds barred, let it all hang out type of > > discussion. These open forums tend to be hostile and > > attack/defend type things where one has great trouble achieving > > unity and discovering truth. > > "Achieving unity and discovering truth": Usually means > thinking the same as the moderators who know how others > should regard any given subject.... > > > > > In time I feel we will be developed enough to be self regulating. > > Self-censoring is how I read that.... > > > Personally the moderators are not trying to censor anyone, just > > keep things in perspective by applying principles of full, frank > > and honest opinions, tempered with courtesy, tact and wisdom. I > > really appreciate the wonderful job they do. I too have had > > submissions refused but they always kindly and lovingly give their > > reason and most of the times I feel it is valid. Course they and > > I both know that none of us is perfect. > > You too have been censored by them? "Most of the times" (note the > plural) you think it's "valid"? "Not trying to censor anyone"? It > appears to me there is much confused thinking here.... > > > > > We Baha'is know how suppressing it can be for a soul to want to > > find the truth and not be able to because of negative emotions > > clouding issues so we want to create a safe and secure, loving > > atmosphere where freedom of speech can be enjoyed in such a way > > that it will not distress anyone. > > A very frightening rationale, which horrible historical > precedents.... > > > > > My children are not allowed to use foul language, attack one > > another, use put downs, categorize things by labelling people or > > showing racist or other forms of divisiveness that impede soul > > relations. I feel to a great extent we are all kind of like > > spiritual children and do need some detached moderation. > > > > We have all sorts of wonderful teachings about speech and how we > > must conduct ourselves in term of fulfilling our overall goal of > > love and unity in the world and they all fit scientific findings. > > However not everyone has read these or tried them on for size and > > we lapse back into speech patterns that do not reflect our reality > > and cause disunity. > > "Scientific findings"? Ahhhmmmm.... Can you quote those for > us? > > > > > In addition we join this list knowing that it is moderated and we > > mostly all agree that it should be. So our part of the agreement > > is to follow these list guidelines and cooperate to make the world > > a better place. > > Or off with your head.... > > > > > I believe it might be a good idea for the Moderators to post the > > List guidelines. If you don't agree with them then say why and I > > am sure they will listen. > > I am not so sure. > > > > > with all due respect, > > doug > > [clip] > > -- > Frederick Glaysher > UseNet: alt.religion.bahai > Ask your ISP to add it; also available on > www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. -- -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Thu Aug 14 10:57:14 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Thu Aug 14 07:18:13 1997 Received: (qmail 19804 invoked from network); 14 Aug 1997 14:18:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.124) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 14 Aug 1997 14:18:07 -0000 Message-ID: <33F313EA.6EEA@hotmail.com> Date: Thu, 14 Aug 1997 10:19:22 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc,news.admin.censorship,news.admin.net-abuse.misc,news.admi n.misc,soc.culture.iranian,soc.culture,israel,soc.rights.human CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Censorship on soc.religion.bahai & the approaching next vote for talk.religion.bahai References: <33F1A8FF.4069@hotmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 5661 Emma Pease wrote: > > In <33F1A8FF.4069@hotmail.com> Frederick Glaysher writes: > > >I'm posting this censored message to your newsgroup because > >there has been long and continued experience and allegations of > >censorship by myself and others on soc.religion.bahai > > You might want to double check the above paragraph. It can be > understood as saying you were the one accused of censoring and not > that you are accusing others of censoring. Of course I didn't intend that. > > >All three of the reasons given below are bogus, in my opinion. > >This message does address the crucial existence of censorship > >in the Bahai Faith; it adds to and states ideas not found in > >the other three messages (by my count); AND please someone > >point out to me WHERE in my message there is "abusive > >language." > > >A NO vote campaign was orchestrated to defeat an umoderated > >newsgroup, talk.religion.bahai, in late March 1997. Since > >there have already been intimations that a similar NO vote > >will be marshalled against the 157 people who voted YES > >last time I hope you'll take a few minutes to look at this > >message and the censorship that is taking place on UseNet. > > You are entitled to start the ball rolling again for a new group in > late September (6 months from late March). However, too many > cross-postings of messages in non-relevant groups and a lack of a > followup line set to a single group is likely to turn people against > you irregardless of the merits of having an unmoderated bahai group in > the Big 8. I still feel that much of the NO voting was anti-Glaysher > and not anti-group. However, with 157 yes votes it probably should > have passed. I truly don't believe the cross-posting to a carefully selected number of newsgroups is irrelevant. The ones I have been posting to were all suggested by my group-mentor way back in December 1996 as relevant to discussion for talk.religion.bahai. I use Netscape Gold 3.0 and am not aware of any way to set followups to a single newsgroup. I'd appreciate a little instruction in that regard if anyone knows of a way to do it. I appreciate your acknowledging what is merely the injustice of the situation. 157 YES votes should have passed---had not 691 intolerant Bahais voted NO for unethical, religious reasons.... > > As regards to the message in question, it is 89 lines long of which 53 > lines are quoted material and 13 lines are your own text (the rest is > signature and blank lines). I would have rejected it solely on the > grounds of insufficient new material. I also note that your messages > are not infrequently posted on soc.religion.bahai and that you have > three posts out of the eleven total (according to my local news spool) > in the censorship thread on that group. You're including the lines of editorial explanation of the rejected post, I believe. Also, the excuse that I had posted too many messages on the same theme is spurious, especially since I was responding in each case to different people. The "moderators" I believe are merely using that as another smoke-screen to hide their censoring behind. It's the content of my message that was suppressed as Boatright's comments reveal. > > I'm also not sure what you expect the people on all the other groups > you cross-posted your message to do? People tend to have short > memories, and, you might have better luck having people pay attention > once the talk group's RFD has been submitted. Well, it seems to me there is now a very, very long history of censorship on soc.religion.bahai with many people other than myself saying so. The record exists on www.dejanews.com for those willing to read the 3000 messages that provide the evidence of it. The same rigid, authoritarian voices of self-proclaimed orthodox Bahai censorship are clearly now preparing, I believe, to defeat the next vote for an unmoderated newsgroup on the Big 8.... If I wait until the RFD is out, there won't be time for people to investigate the issue fully and make up their own minds. So it seems to me.... I appreciate your sharing with me your perspective on this and welcome any further comments you might have. > > alt.religion.bahai - legit > talk.religion.misc - legit > soc.rights.human - possibly legit for this discussion > soc.culture.iranian - possibly legit for this discussion > soc.culture.israel - why is this group on the list? The Bahai World Center is located in Haifa, Israel, and many Israelis know that... It seems to me that if censorship and deceit is a matter of daily operation for soc.religion.bahai, and perhaps supported by the Bahai Administration itself, in their country, they might find it relevant to know that.... > news-admin.censorship - group doesn't exist (news.admin.censorship does) oops, thanks. > news.admin.net-abuse - group doesn't exist oops, again: news.admin.net-abuse.MISC > news.admin.misc - possibly legit for this discussion > news.admin.net-misc - group doesn't exist > news.admin.misc.usenet - group doesn't exist > > I've set followups to talk.religion.misc; however, I suspect you > actually want to use news.admin.censorship for discussion on this > issue. Sincerely, thank you again.... > > Emma > > -- > \---- > |\* | Emma Pease Net Spinster > |_\/ emma@csli.stanford.edu Die Luft der Freiheit weht -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Wed Aug 13 08:12:17 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Wed Aug 13 04:49:13 1997 Received: (qmail 7505 invoked from network); 13 Aug 1997 11:49:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.119) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 13 Aug 1997 11:49:09 -0000 Message-ID: <33F19F9B.39AE@hotmail.com> Date: Wed, 13 Aug 1997 07:50:51 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc,soc.rights.human,soc.culture.iranian,soc.culture.israel CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: censorship/moderators Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 1099 Frederick Glaysher wrote: > > [Moderators Note: While the moderators allowed the original post, and > will allow reasonable replys, please note that the subject of the > newsgroup as stated in the monthly introduction posting is "the > beliefs and teachings of the Baha'i Faith. Followups to this article > should address the beliefs and teachings of the faith, or be directed > to talk.religon.misc, alt.religion.bahai or news.groups. > > -- The Moderators] > > shahin nikjoo wrote: > > > > Hi, [clip] > > > > Is the 'moderator' policy asked for by the NSA?? > > An excellent question. I'm glad someone has finally > had the prescence of mind to ask it.... > > [Answer: No. The moderators have no instruction from any elected > Baha'i administrative level. -- mods] Have the moderators been instructed by the NSA or anyone in the Bahai administration to respond to this question in this way? [clip] -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Wed Jul 09 07:13:37 1997 >From peterjensen314@hotmail.com Tue Jul 8 17:14:46 1997 Received: (from root@localhost) by f49.hotmail.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id RAA07182; Tue, 8 Jul 1997 17:13:39 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199707090013.RAA07182@f49.hotmail.com> Received: from 129.174.56.64 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Tue, 08 Jul 1997 17:13:38 PDT X-Originating-IP: [129.174.56.64] From: "j bau" To: FG@hotmail.com Subject: commentary(very long) Content-Type: text/plain Date: Tue, 08 Jul 1997 17:13:38 PDT X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 17074 Fred, if I may call you that. I sympathize with your running commentary on Usenet, and agree with most(about 95%) of it. It is not necessarily the Persians' fault, things in the Faith could be a lot better, but then when they used to put forth Farsi as world aux lang, they were begging for criticism. I've enough experience with other cultures, that, in your case (American), your culture might give you a blind spot, in the sense most Americans think they're the best, and after WWII to about 1990, very few in the world would disagree with Americans, save maybe the French. It is not necessarily the Persian's "fault", in the sense that most Baha'is have some responsibility for present screw-ups, you included. While a case for their having greater responsibility if you consider they're supposed to know all about Baha'i and have been Baha'i longer than anyone else exists. Then, so too most US Baha'is will go around claiming to know all about the Faith, and the Covenant, too. They're not responsible for everything. I look at it(having been Baha'i about as long as you have), if the Faith isn't doing much, then certainly the NSA-US for one, and you for another, can continue doing whatever you do. You get to complain. So too, others and Persians doing whatever they do. In that respect NSA-US is not competent either, nor for that matter, UHJ. The question is what exactly do you do, different and better than whatever NSA-US, your LSA, the various Institutions or Persians do? Yes, I'd noticed the Baha'i system has some problems. No, the Faith is not corrupt, nor generally are the Baha'is or IN faithless, BUT there are enough screw ups, perhaps to the mass of unbiased non-Baha'is might agree it looks like something's wrong, And possibly there might be a handful corrupt. The issue I see, is a matter of justice. Let's say there is some corrupt or damned Baha'i being wrong or even Covenant-Breaking, what to do? One of my disagreements with the Institutions was the Writings clearly say the Guardian(in whose absence the House) decides what is CB, yet large numbers of believers going around saying "That's CB!", which is the disobedience of (basically) Rulers(more often Assemblies). That expected on declaration, no surprise there of Baha'i proclivities(deciding what's Baha'i is perogative of Assemblies). But as Baha'is have a definition of CB, then should not the House decide the various Assemblies disobey and are therefore CB if not damned? I agree trb/arb has a certain utility, and expected 300-400 "no" votes. Mark Towfigh for example is more typical of a more competent Baha'i Youth(one more average Youth loudly proclaimed "Baha'u'llah is So Holy, that He Never Had Sex!" as in Abdul'Baha was of Immaculate Conception?) Whether or not NSA-Iceland or someone using their address/name to vote "no", is kinda immaterial since the Assembly has sovereign rights. The Faith has been encouraging Assemblies to demonstrate initiative(only more recently has(I was told) the House "liberalize" enough that Assemblies are supposed to let individuals go out and do things(like teach), without "Permission"). The only thing you can do about NSA-Iceland(and questionable whether khosher or a good idea) to prevent future Assemblies from doing so again, is to go be an Icelander; ask whether some idiot did something wrong, or ask the House, your Assembly(N/LSA) or NSA-Iceland what the hell happened? And if your NSA acts as others I've dealt with, at best you'll get some guidance on the rights of a Ruler(and most likely, answer: "sovereignty"). While 600 "no" votes was a bit high, it was plausible, since if Baha'i are the meek who will inherit the earth, more Baha'is are going to "lurk" than normal. The meek can be as "fanatic" as anyone else! I never expected(contrary to popular representation) that Baha'is, or you for that matter, are so bahai as not to do something really stupid as Mark did. It is very possible that was Mark's only lifetime royal screwup, since he certainly wasn't such an idiot when he lived at home. Sure, you have the right to do whatever you do, and someone ought to, if only to demonstrate a variety of Baha'i views(or to be more crass, to see if/when/how some Ruler removes Your rights). I studied Communism for about a decade(probably better than deepening on Baha'i, since I don't really care about most traditional Baha'i forms, my declaration had not much to do with most of the Writings cited for deepening. the CB Remey arguments as rational as Shi'i or Ahmaddiya). I am surprised your arguments for Persian whatever, that you don't bother quoting Baha'u'llah or Ruhiyyih Khanum of how bad Persians are. Paraphrasing the Hand Furutan: Communism is just like the Faith, except for the secret ballot and belief in God. Or if you like, Baha'is aren't competent enough to be fascists(nor racist enough to be Nazis. The Faith is probably communistic in that the Books' ideal society is communal. When Persians speak of apres-vous at a stop sign? only under communism could Baha'is spend all day encouraging the other to proceed first. Certainly there's a lot to criticize Persians for, were Americans that obedient, there'd be a helluva lot more Baha'is in America, too. Persians esp. in Iran have periodic pograms ie martyrdoms; Baha'u'llah changing the Babis, Told them not to go out to get themselves killed, their behavior Eastern, to a large extent. If the tradition for a millennium was to prepare that horse, the white one for the Imam, to ride out to death and glory, and your Lord spends about a generation telling you not to get yourself killed, your behavior is going to change. I'd also note a bunch of Jews and Zoroastrians also became Baha'i, and you are aware only half the Iranians are Persian? Yes, Persians in general have some problems, but probably not all Persians that screwed up, though there appeared to be a few willing to attack you in order to preserve the Faith. I've hung around some Shi'i and Iranians, there is a distinct difference between Baha'i and those who aren't. And if you haven't noticed, most US Baha'i behavior is not typically American; well, no alcohol or sex. (Persians, esp. recently from Iran, can speak of how dangerous it is, teaching) What's the US reason not to go out and Teach? You have heard(used?) excuses not to? And if y'all not teaching, that gives plenty of time to do other things; for Assemblies, Administering. I've heard of some Baha'is detached of material problems. Very spiritual; but there are some material problems besides meeting material goals, money appears to be half the Assemblies' concern. My view is, most Rulers are immersed in Administration, focused on Funds, ignor what is essential to bringing in large numbers. And guess who gets to pay for most of it, when there aren't large numbers? The issue isn't really money, rather doing the impossible; as the House Writes, it would be a good idea to get more numbers. The Dialogue/Talisman fiasco(problem) some had their rights removed. As far as I've heard NSA-US at least learned not to remove your rights given their earlier fiasco. It appears at worse formally some Learned didn't communicate with you well; then half of that is your fault, isn't it? I wouldn't bother saying "grow up", since there are a lot of Baha'is(now and in times to come) out there less mature than you, and someone gets to be the "goat" that the Rulers, community get to learn how to deal with varieties of situations, better you than me. We look at it from other perspectives. Since y'all aren't doing much, even if the American Baha'i community has improved(has any Ruler suggested your Breaking the Covenant?), the problem is not what the Faith/Baha'is now do, rather what can or should be done. Yes, trb or arb, a good idea. Certainly when srb edits/reviews/censors posts, the trend is toward censorship and existence of Usenet/Internet should not support that, but when a not very Baha'i/disagreeable post occurs, should not you or other Baha'is in good standing be able to defend or mitigate opposing posts? In that sense I agree that srb is probably censoring, if not now, eventually. Their issue is not their right to censor, rather the quality of the site. And more recently, in part thanks to you, sci is more vocal than srb, congrads. Is any of this a problem? not really. When I declared I hypothesized a "Baha'i Letter" where the primary reason believers don't communicate to Haifa much, that doing so is supposed to write baha'i. Talisman is also supposed to have simular communication problems. Over the long run in terms of generations or centuries these problems are growing pains, experience for believers and Institutions, and a pain in the butt for those who get to experience being on the receiving end of Administration. If there is any consolation, your experiences is as much as result of the American Faith as the Persian, your ability is as much testing to the Institutions as it is to yourself. The analogy is of those Baha'is who pray for tests, tend do something like suicide on receiving them, you create most of your problems(I'd say Mark and the other coupla Persians assisting). Yes, someone should in order that Assemblies (usually)get to be tested and not just business as usual Administration. I'd suggest you ignor the few who flame you whom I haven't seen for a while. If your objective is to promote arb, then everytime you answer a commentary, raise 2 new controversial(topics srb wouldn't ever bother discussing; besides women on the House or homosexuals). Baha'is claiming to be competent usually take 2 yrs to get around to changing. be patient. My opinion is the Faith is barely mature enough to defend its positions against Islam(though I might be wrong, since there are allegedly Eastern Baha'is who know more than I've heard), let alone the Remey CB, or in the US against Christians. In that sense, many Baha'is come across as fanatics, however about half your material does too, even if your rationale is as good as those you are opposing. The srb "censorship" is already coming to a head, when you consider the amount of messages related to the numbers of reviewers reviewing, that issue is as Ruler claims to the efficacy of Administering with regard to teaching or enrollments, who are they kidding(no or little declarations, not much need for those Administering)? Though I'm not expecting srb to eliminate review for at least 3-5 years(in favor of a quick scan of the posts), and a decade to generation before total lack of review. I would suggest you review what is your objective relative to what you want to do. Some Baha'is who would agree with you, quit trying to change which is also not good. While there is propaganda in the Faith which effectively the Guardian Wrote and probably the House and other Write, and there isn't really such a thing as Baha'i Culture(since there isn't much of a Baha'i Civilization ie not enough "numbers" or society for any of it to exist), then there's also not much Baha'i Art either. There is such a thing as Baha'i art/baha'i art, and Rulers can decide whether something isn't Baha'i Art. Certainly much of it is propaganda, but is that also not the case for much or most of Muslim/Christian/etc Art, not to mention advertisements? You are aware most, if not all Baha'is do whatever in their belief of serving the Faith or obeying their Lord? Using Christian(Western) logic, if you are not "saved"(Baha'i or whatever), then you are damned? right? You, most Persians and competent Baha'is ought to know the fallacies inherent in logic, the best one being just before the moment of death you can recant to save your soul; the Persian one being the guy on his deathbed said the Guardian was a "whippersnapper"(hence "doomed" to hell) before dying. I'd use the Guardian definition of CB, where so long as you don't hate the Faith while claiming to be Baha'i, it's not likely you're CB. On the other hand, claiming to be Baha'i, what are you trying to do, where quite a few express disparaging remarks? For other than the couple of assholes, I'd point out most often the majority of Baha'is will vote against change, are not Baha'is "the meek who will inherit the earth"? Certain various Institutions have said it's dangerous to teach, much as trb is also dangerous, since you've committed an aweful lot(and we're proud you do so), is it not a good idea you make it comfortable there? Say the CB will post to arb, being not moderated, would you comment or respond to them?(hell, if more competent Baha'is don't(Counselors or other Learned), you may as well.) You're being on the receiving end of attention, srb in effect forbids controversy, can arb do better(by being so, validates the claim no moderating required.)? Your cry might be you're being picked on. I'd note your position is simular to the typical NSA-Secretary who elected because he's the only native knowing English(I know one), you grow into being competent. My criticism of generally Rulers is, the situation sucks, yet everyone claims they're doing everything right. There is no complaint of what is done right, much as you're doing doing anything seriously as wrong as Mark did. Mark shouldn't have posted what he did(I've seen him do some stupid things, but nothing that idiotic), neither should you merely answer complaints or not explain your attacks. You can do better. The more recent Muslim attacks and CB expositions are more in line with what I'd do, were I trying to attack or persuade the Faith and it's believers. There's a Siyyih Housayn?Nasr, probably the most famous living Siyyid(was a professor at Georgetown and Harvard/Yale) (Shi'i)edited a book on the expectant millennium which totally ignors and goes around Babi/Baha'i. That's the cheapest way to attack the Faith, totally ignor it. You are somewhat right to defend yourself, and I'd refer back to previous post lists, except when something new occurs(as it looks like you're doing). In essence the complaint ought to center on you being Baha'i, specifically on how Baha'i you are. Taking Mark as an example , if he only screwed up royally once, and you get the blunt of it (lucky you), certainly you get to use him as the example. It would be a better idea to have more and other examples of Baha'i 'perfidity'. Yes, there are other examples, and I won't bother giving them to you, how many can you document in sufficient detail that demonstrate a trend of questionable Baha'iness? by OWO stds? Our guess is the Faith gets to be held to higher stds, and indirectly so too are Baha'is. Now socially, it would be advisable not to expect others of the Faith to be so Baha'i, with the understanding that you're not held to such high stds(and yes, some Persians can be more a pain expecting stds non-Persians are supposed to maintain.) At this point in time and conditions, it might be a good idea to try doing different things, hopefully competent and Baha'i that as you do things you do better as time progresses, when the Faith is still in relative obscurity. In that respect better that Mark screwed up before, than a couple years from now when Opposition actively looking for signs of perfidity. Hey, if you're lucky in a couple years if arb/trb isn't popular, srb will cease reviewing(not likely). Eventually I'll get around to emailing this to UHJ. You don't have permission to do much but read/reply(ie no quotes/attributions either; feel free to comment). If you had no idea what you were getting into with trb(congrads on your test), hopefully you learned more about our Faith. What you do Is important, merely you can probably do so better. And since I don't want to, you have my $.02 worth of support(but not my vote). The long view is eventually all Baha'is will be tested as you were. What is at issue is how the Faith will function as a result of tests, not necessarily how well you do; merely better for you that you improve as a result of those tests, hopefully will do better than getting your reward in heaven. While I'm in MI every few years, though relations have brought me to Oakland College? it is more likely within a generation to meet at some Baha'i affair. Good luck, don't let the bastards get you down, don't let the bedbugs bite either. _______________________________________________________ Get Private Web-Based Email Free https://www.hotmail.com From - Mon May 12 08:17:22 1997 >From dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Mon May 12 03:45:24 1997 Received: (from dopost@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id FAA16348; Mon, 12 May 1997 05:32:04 -0500 Path: grunt.dejanews.com!not-for-mail Date: Mon, 12 May 1997 05:32:02 -0600 From: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Conscience Newsgroups: soc.culture.israel,soc.culture.iranian,soc.rights.human Message-Id: <863432819.16275@dejanews.com> Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service To: FG@hotmail.com X-Article-Creation-Date: Mon May 12 10:27:01 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.119 () X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) X-Authenticated-Sender: FG@hotmail.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 6094 [This is a courtesy copy of an article posted to Usenet via Deja News] Dr Steve Burgess wrote: > > FG@hotmail.com recently posted a quotation from Abdu'l-Baha on > freedom of religious conscience and belief. This is an interesting > concept often debated during the last year in the group. Free speech is > not without responsibility and we often ignore this in discussing the > Baha'i viewpoint on free speech. I have seen much posted about > backbiting but very little about calumny. What you seem to be ignoring, to my mind, is Abdu'l-Baha's own words on freedom of conscience and belief. Why? Find them unpalatable? > > Might I add a few more quotes to help Fred Glaysher more accurately > balance the Baha'i concept of free speech with a few more quotes > concerning limitations on the content of free speech? I find it interesting that in stead of discussing the quotation I posted you launch into firing other passages back at me. I don't believe that's fair or that it does justice to the Writings. It is an immense Ocean. If we are to avoid the fact that any devil can quote scripture, we need to at least listen to the words that are quoted to begin with.... > > In sooth, there will be found in those regions certain persons like > the Pharisees of the time of Christ, who, night and day, will exert > themselves with all heart and soul to cast forth doubts, in order that > they may deprive the souls of the glad-tidings of the Holy Spirit. They > will disseminate false rumors and utter many a calumny and will publish > and announce stories. They will undertake all these only for the sake > of earthly vanities. (`Abdu'l-Baha: Baha'i World Faith*, page 388) Please use quotation marks around the words of the Writings. I find your quoting this passage less than honorable. By your clear implication, I'm a Pharisee in your reckoning.... It seems to me, since you're utterly ignoring the Words of Abdu'l-Baha and immediately striking out with nasty suggestions that you're not truly interest in the freedom of conscience He expressed respect for.... Essentially, you're shouting "Fire" in a theater.... > > Those who would have men believe that religion is their own private > property once more bring their efforts to bear against the Sun of > Truth: they resist the Command of God; they invent calumnies, not > having arguments against it, neither proofs. They attack with masked > faces, not daring to come forth into the light of day. > Our methods are different, we do not attack, neither calumniate; we > do not wish to dispute with them; we bring forth proofs and arguments; > we invite them to confute our statements. They cannot answer us, but > instead, they write all they can think of against the Divine Messenger, > Baha'u'llah. I don't recall immediately the context Abdu'l-Baha says this all in in Paris Talks. I'm concerned that you're switching contexts. What are your "proofs and arguments"? I gave you the Writings on freedom of the human conscience, you give me insinuations. Speak up clearly so all understand what you're getting at. > Do not let your hearts be troubled by these defamatory writings! > Obey the words of Baha'u'llah and answer them not. Rejoice, rather, > that even these falsehoods will result in the spread of the truth. When > these slanders appear inquiries are made, and those who inquire are led > into a knowledge of the Faith. > (`Abdu'l-Baha: Paris Talks*, page 103) > > For over a period of thirty years, always increasing their efforts, > they inflicted extreme anguish on Abdu'l-Baha; and they did not, in all > this span, ever take one step nor draw a single breath to help the > Faith. They spent their entire time in attempts to wean to beloved of > God away from obedience to the Centre of the Covenant, and to undermine > their convictions, making them waver in their faith, and turning them > cold; and because of what they did, thousands of souls were veiled from > the holy Cause, and prevented from embracing it. > Such then is a glimpse of their aims and actions, which made them > to be cut off from the Holy Tree, and excluded them from glory and joy > everlasting. They lost out, both here and hereafter, and `this verily is > utter perdition'.(1) > (Shoghi Effendi: Bahiyyih Khanum, pages 137-138) Again, to a beautiful passage by Abdu'l-Baha, you respond with intimations of covenant breaking! Shame on you.... > > 2253. Surely in this very critical period of human history when old > institutions are beginning to crumble down or being considerably > modified, there is a certain amount of maladjustments and unfortunate > happenings; but such a condition is not permanent. The Cause and its > institutions will gradually take their place and with its virile spirit > secure the full obedience of its followers and of the people of the > world as a whole. Let's face it. It's just not happening, and apparently isn't going to happen either. Why? I suggest because of very fanatical interpretations of the Bahai Writings that are DRIVING people away.... Interpretations like Mr. Burgess' in this response to my quoting a wonderful passage from Abdu'l-Baha.... So we need not be too pessimistic as to the future or > take passing conditions too seriously. The young people who are living > between these two eras, and seeing the destruction of old institutions > are therefore apt to discard all respect for them and in fact view with > contempt any person that may still cherish the old. Hence we see the > loose morality prevalent among them. This condition is not true only of > America and Europe but also of the East, and I dare say in the East more > than in the West. > (Shoghi Effendi: Youth, page 422) -- Frederick Glaysher Rochester Hills, Michigan USA UseNet: alt.religion.bahai -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet From - Fri Jun 13 07:24:21 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Fri Jun 13 04:08:45 1997 Received: (qmail 12294 invoked from network); 13 Jun 1997 11:08:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.118) by hm3.hotmail.com with SMTP; 13 Jun 1997 11:08:43 -0000 Message-ID: <33A12A89.10AD@hotmail.com> Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 07:10:01 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,misc.misc,talk.religion.misc CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: covenant breakers #2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 744 A month or two ago I posted to alt.religion.bahai a message, "covenant breakers," that explained my views on the subject. Basically, the man had no children, and I trust the Hands of the Cause did the right thing.... Please feel free to search dejanews.com for it, if you wish.... As an open, unmoderated forum all people are free to post to alt.religion.bahai, of which I am not the moderator.... I neither encourage nor deny that right to people who have been declared covenant breakers by the Bahai Administration. But please do not email me with private messages on the subject.... Please feel free to contact the appropriate person in the Bahai Administration.... -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Thu May 22 19:34:13 1997 >From panuser@reference.com Thu May 22 06:01:49 1997 Received: (from panuser@localhost) by shadowfax.reference.com (8.8.5/8.8.4) id FAA10930; Thu, 22 May 1997 05:59:28 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 05:59:28 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199705221259.FAA10930@shadowfax.reference.com> From: FG@hotmail.com Newsgroups: soc.religion.bahai,alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc Cc: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Crossposting policy? Organization: Reference.Com Posting Service X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 704 I and perhaps others would appreciate it if the moderators of soc.religion.bahai would state and post their policy regarding crossposting to soc.religion.bahai, alt.religion.bahai, and perhaps other newsgroups at the same time. I know it's been mentioned in the past and is probably in the charter somewhere but I would appreciate a current statement related to the present stituation. Thank you. Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai -- Posted using Reference.COM https://www.reference.com Browse, Search and Post Usenet and Mailing list Archive and Catalog. InReference, Inc. accepts no responsibility for the content of this posting. From - Thu May 22 19:34:14 1997 >From news@reference.com Thu May 22 05:59:43 1997 Received: (from news@localhost) by bilbo.reference.com (8.8.5/8.8.4) id FAA29421; Thu, 22 May 1997 05:59:40 -0700 (PDT) To: soc-religion-bahai@moderators.uu.net Path: not-for-mail From: FG@hotmail.com Newsgroups: soc.religion.bahai,alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc Subject: Crossposting policy? Date: 22 May 1997 12:59:39 GMT Organization: Reference.Com Posting Service Lines: 22 Message-ID: <5m1fvr$sn7$1@bilbo.reference.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: shadowfax.reference.com Cc: FG@hotmail.com Originator: panuser@reference.com () X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 704 I and perhaps others would appreciate it if the moderators of soc.religion.bahai would state and post their policy regarding crossposting to soc.religion.bahai, alt.religion.bahai, and perhaps other newsgroups at the same time. I know it's been mentioned in the past and is probably in the charter somewhere but I would appreciate a current statement related to the present stituation. Thank you. Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai -- Posted using Reference.COM https://www.reference.com Browse, Search and Post Usenet and Mailing list Archive and Catalog. InReference, Inc. accepts no responsibility for the content of this posting. From - Tue May 27 06:12:10 1997 >From trhan@itchy.serv.net Fri May 23 09:03:47 1997 Received: from localhost (trhan@localhost) by itchy.serv.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id JAA13113; Fri, 23 May 1997 09:02:20 -0700 (PDT) Date: Fri, 23 May 1997 09:02:19 -0700 (PDT) From: Teri Rhan To: Fredrick Glaysher cc: srb moderators Subject: Re: Crossposting policy? Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 1386 Dear Fred, The moderation policy has always been to not forward crossposts. This policy is consistent with the policy of many moderated groups and stems from not only the extra, very tedious work involved but also from the fact that many of our moderators do not have the tools necessary to propogate crossposts. We would, therefore, encourage you to use the standard netiquette of separate postings to srb as well as the other newsgroups when you feel the need for a wider broadcast of your postings. Teri Rhan trhan@serv.net Co-moderator, soc.religion.bahai On 22 May 1997 FG@hotmail.com wrote: > I and perhaps others would appreciate it if the moderators > of soc.religion.bahai would state and post their policy > regarding crossposting to soc.religion.bahai, > alt.religion.bahai, and perhaps other newsgroups at the same > time. > > I know it's been mentioned in the past and is probably in the > charter somewhere but I would appreciate a current statement > related to the present stituation. > > Thank you. > > Frederick Glaysher > UseNet: alt.religion.bahai > > > -- > > Posted using Reference.COM https://www.reference.com > Browse, Search and Post Usenet and Mailing list Archive and Catalog. > > InReference, Inc. accepts no responsibility for the content of this posting. > From - Tue May 27 07:54:07 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Tue May 27 04:52:43 1997 Received: (qmail 3251 invoked from network); 27 May 1997 11:50:32 -0000 Received: from softdnserror (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.20) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 27 May 1997 11:50:32 -0000 Message-ID: <338ACA84.F70@hotmail.com> Date: Tue, 27 May 1997 07:50:28 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,misc.misc CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Crossposting to SRB Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 1350 FYI: Subject: Re: Crossposting policy? Date: Fri, 23 May 1997 09:02:19 -0700 (PDT) From: Teri Rhan To: Fredrick Glaysher CC: srb moderators Dear Fred, The moderation policy has always been to not forward crossposts. This policy is consistent with the policy of many moderated groups and stems from not only the extra, very tedious work involved but also from the fact that many of our moderators do not have the tools necessary to propogate crossposts. We would, therefore, encourage you to use the standard netiquette of separate postings to srb as well as the other newsgroups when you feel the need for a wider broadcast of your postings. Teri Rhan trhan@serv.net Co-moderator, soc.religion.bahai On 22 May 1997 FG@hotmail.com wrote: > I and perhaps others would appreciate it if the moderators > of soc.religion.bahai would state and post their policy > regarding crossposting to soc.religion.bahai, > alt.religion.bahai, and perhaps other newsgroups at the same > time. > > I know it's been mentioned in the past and is probably in the > charter somewhere but I would appreciate a current statement > related to the present stituation. > > Thank you. > > Frederick Glaysher > UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Tue Aug 26 07:18:26 1997 >From hkt@wwa.com Mon Aug 25 19:41:34 1997 Received: from poolf3-042.wwa.com [207.241.63.171] by hirame.wwa.com with smtp (Smail3.1.29.WWA) id m0x3BXu-000WMlC@hirame.wwa.com; Mon, 25 Aug 1997 21:40:14 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 21:39:54 -0500 (CDT) X-Sender: hkt@pop.wwa.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: FG@hotmail.com From: Henrietta Thomas Subject: Re:draft alt.religion.bahai X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 1672 At 05:52 PM 8/25/97 -0400, you wrote: >Henrietta Thomas wrote: > >> >> I have no idea why your server couldn't find wwa.com. Hmmmm..... > >A bug in there somewhere.... > >> >> Anyway, I got your revised RFD, and it looks pretty good to me. >> Glad my suggestions were acceptable, and urge you to go ahead and >> send it in to group-advice. > >I think I have to wait until late September, don't I? The >RESULTS was post on March 27th. I think I have to wait >until after that, though I haven't asked. Do you know? The rule is six months after a failed vote. So count six months from the date of the last vote. You are probably right that you'll have to wait until the end of next month. >> Thanks for explaining why you are sending a full RFD to the Iran >> and Israel newsgroups. I knew there had to be a reason, so I learned >> something from you. >> >> The important thing is for you to keep your cool and not get involved >> in a bunch of long drawn-out arguments over what happened last time. >> Most people would rather forget it anyway, and start off with a fresh >> new slate. > >You're probably right.... I have the human impulse to want to >still settle old scores. Surely best to forget it all if >possible, or as much as possible.... I'm going to think >long and hard on that strategy. I appreciate your mentioning >it. I know it's hard. We all have the same problem. But there's a saying, "don't get mad, get even." And the best way to "get even" is to get your own unmoderated group going. Don't do anything to jeopardize that. >> Good luck, > >Thanks. I'll need it. You're welcome. Henrietta From - Tue Jun 10 08:11:40 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Tue Jun 10 05:05:56 1997 Received: (qmail 25447 invoked from network); 10 Jun 1997 12:05:55 -0000 Received: from ts?rh.metronet.lib.mi.us (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.20) by hm3.hotmail.com with SMTP; 10 Jun 1997 12:05:55 -0000 Message-ID: <339D4375.1E40@hotmail.com> Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 08:07:17 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: help@hotmail.com CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Email account compromised? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 979 Someone sent the following message to my email account last Friday. I'm not sure how this was done but I want to contact hotmail.com in case you can figure out what the person actually did. I don't think he or she posted from my email account but perhaps only used my address in the FROM line?? Or has my account been compromised somehow? I'd appreciate your help. Thanks. Fred Glaysher ----------begin message: >From FG@hotmail.com Fri Jun 6 17:22:33 1997 Received: from hotmail.com ([205.161.129.79]) by basement.replay.com (8.8.5/RePlay, Inc.) with SMTP id CAA21398 for FG@hotmail.com; Sat, 7 Jun 1997 02:22:25 +0200 (MET DST) Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 02:22:25 +0200 (MET DST) From: FG@hotmail.com Message-Id: <199706070022.CAA21398@basement.replay.com> Subject: So! The truth comes out... I know what you are. You will be exposed. You have been warned. ----------end message -- Frederick Glaysher From - Wed Jun 11 05:58:11 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Tue Jun 10 05:14:41 1997 Received: (qmail 25464 invoked from network); 10 Jun 1997 12:12:57 -0000 Received: from ts?rh.metronet.lib.mi.us (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.20) by hm3.hotmail.com with SMTP; 10 Jun 1997 12:12:57 -0000 Message-ID: <339D451C.35B0@hotmail.com> Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 08:14:20 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: abuse@replay.com CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Threatening message from replay.com References: <339D4375.1E40@hotmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 879 Someone sent me a threatening message from replay.com. I would appreciate your contacting the individual and requesting he or she desist.... Others have advised me to contact a lawyer, which I may do if it continues.... -----begin message > >From FG@hotmail.com Fri Jun 6 17:22:33 1997 > Received: from hotmail.com ([205.161.129.79]) > by basement.replay.com (8.8.5/RePlay, Inc.) with SMTP id > CAA21398 > for FG@hotmail.com; Sat, 7 Jun 1997 02:22:25 +0200 (MET > DST) > Date: Sat, 7 Jun 1997 02:22:25 +0200 (MET DST) > From: FG@hotmail.com > Message-Id: <199706070022.CAA21398@basement.replay.com> > Subject: So! The truth comes out... > > I know what you are. You will be exposed. You have been warned. > ----------end message > > -- > Frederick Glaysher -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Thu May 22 19:34:21 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Thu May 22 13:44:12 1997 Received: (qmail 1966 invoked from network); 21 May 1997 13:34:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.117) by hm2.hotmail.com with SMTP; 21 May 1997 13:34:24 -0000 Message-ID: <3382FA1E.11F1@hotmail.com> Date: Wed, 21 May 1997 09:35:26 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai To: Notarius Subject: Re: email echo/listserv: alt.religion.bahai References: <19970521124504.1739.qmail@nym.alias.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 2142 Notarius wrote: > = > Frederick, > did you see this post? I borrowed an account at work and checked > a European newsserver. > There were 3-4 articles that I hadnt seen on reference.com. > Other articles were missing. > We need the list. I think you're right. I've noticed the same thing on reference.com. It might be they don't subscribe to all the newsgroups that people are crossposting too. I'm not sure. = I check out the suggested free mail list, which is in Spain. My college Spanish is a little rusty.... How's yours? Incidentally, sorry if your server experienced a problem a few = days ago.... > = > From: neimagebla@geocities.com (Pedro Macan=E1s Valverde :-# mu.es) > Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,bit.admin,alt.config > Subject: Re: email echo/listserv: alt.religion.bahai > Date: Sun, 18 May 1997 16:51:27 GMT > Organization: Unisource Espana NEWS SERVER > Lines: 23 > Message-ID: <335a0215.10282838@news.arrakis.es> > References: <5int1b$jpm$1@bilbo.reference.com> > Reply-To: mac@royal.net > NNTP-Posting-Host: 195.5.65.3 > X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.1/16.230 > = > 14 Apr 1997 17:05:58 -0400, jim@american.edu (Jim McIntosh) skribis: > = > >In article <5int1b$jpm$1@bilbo.reference.com>, FG@hotmail.com w= rote: > >> Can you set up, or help me set up, an email echo/listserv for > >> alt.religion.bahai? > > > >First of all, FG@hotmail.com doesn't seem to be a valid e-mail > >address so I'm not sure who I'm talking to: > > > > ----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors ----- > >FG@hotmail.com > > > > ----- Transcript of session follows ----- > >... while talking to mail.hotmail.com.: > >>>> DATA > ><<< 550 Unknown user > >554 FG@hotmail.com... Service unavailable > > > >Second, in response to your inquiry, we cannot set up a list for you b= ut if > >you get a list we can connect it to the newsgroup. > > > = > You can get a mailing list at https://www.mundivia.es . -- = Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Tue May 27 06:12:03 1997 >From notarius@nym.alias.net Fri May 23 05:21:27 1997 Date: 23 May 1997 12:21:25 -0000 Message-ID: <19970523122125.1798.qmail@nym.alias.net> From: Notarius To: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: email echo/listserv: alt.religion.bahai X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 783 >I think you're right. I've noticed the same thing on reference.com. >It might be they don't subscribe to all the newsgroups that people >are crossposting too. I'm not sure. = Whenever I mention a missing article it appears at reference.com. That was an important post. If this continues maybe we have a problem. >I check out the suggested free mail list, which is in Spain. My >college Spanish is a little rusty.... How's yours? My Spanish is not that good, but I sent a short translation to a.r.b. >Incidentally, sorry if your server experienced a problem a few = >days ago.... Due to the nature of this account incoming mail is sometimes lost. Dejanews has a big problem. a.r.b. is mailbombed with sexmail. I guess other servers filter the posts. From - Tue May 27 06:12:16 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Tue May 27 02:43:49 1997 Received: (from root@localhost) by f14.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id CAA08397; Tue, 27 May 1997 02:43:47 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199705270943.CAA08397@f14.hotmail.com> Received: from 199.179.42.20 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Tue, 27 May 1997 02:43:47 PDT X-Originating-IP: [199.179.42.20] From: "Frederick Glaysher" To: notarius@nym.alias.net Cc: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: email echo/listserv: alt.religion.bahai Content-Type: text/plain Date: Tue, 27 May 1997 02:43:47 PDT X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 1205 > >>I think you're right. I've noticed the same thing on reference.com. >>It might be they don't subscribe to all the newsgroups that people >>are crossposting too. I'm not sure. = > >Whenever I mention a missing article it appears at reference.com. >That was an important post. If this continues maybe we have a >problem. > >>I check out the suggested free mail list, which is in Spain. My >>college Spanish is a little rusty.... How's yours? > >My Spanish is not that good, but I sent a short translation to >a.r.b. Thanks. I've been gone for a few days. > >>Incidentally, sorry if your server experienced a problem a few = >>days ago.... > >Due to the nature of this account incoming mail is sometimes lost. >Dejanews has a big problem. a.r.b. is mailbombed with sexmail. >I guess other servers filter the posts. Others filter it out, including I think all NNTP servers, one of which I use most of the time now: www.zippo.com It's $12.00 a year but seems to work fine so far. > > > --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Fri May 09 08:27:12 1997 >From grobe@netins.net Thu Apr 10 16:18:12 1997 Received: from worf.netins.net (grobe@worf.netins.net [167.142.225.4]) by ins1.netins.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id SAA08834 for ; Thu, 10 Apr 1997 18:16:27 -0500 (CDT) Date: Thu, 10 Apr 1997 18:16:27 -0500 (CDT) From: Jonathan Grobe To: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Email echo: alt.religion.bahai In-Reply-To: <199704101144.EAA07764@shadowfax.reference.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 20639 [Previous] [Next] [Current Results] [Get Thread] [Author Profile] [Post] [Post] [Reply] [LINK][LINK] _________________________________________________________________ =20 Article 1 of 78 =20 Subject: comp.mail.misc Internet Mailing List Providers From: edmonds@cs.ubc.ca (Brian Edmonds) Date: 1997/04/08 Message-Id: Newsgroups: comp.mail.misc,comp.mail.list-admin.software,comp.answers,new= s.an swers [More Headers] Archive-name: mail/mailing-lists/providers Posting-frequency: monthly Last-modified: 1997/04/07 02:23:47 Version: 1.36 URL: https://www.cs.ubc.ca/spider/edmonds/usenet/ml-providers.txt =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3 D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3 D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3 D=3D=3D=3D= =3D INTERNET MAILING LIST PROVIDERS $Revision: 1.36 $, $Date: 1997/04/07 02:23:47 $ Copyright (c) 1995-1997, Brian Edmonds =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3 D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3 D=3D=3D=3D= =3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D=3 D=3D=3D=3D= =3D Contents: 1. Introduction 2. Listserv lists 3. No-fee Providers 4. For-fee Providers ------------------------------ Subject: Introduction This list is maintained by Brian Edmonds . Please send all additions, corrections, and comments to this address. New entries and extra information from listed providers are especially welcome. This is a list of individuals, organizations and companies on the net who offer mailing list services, either for a fee, or as a service to the net community. If you wish to start a mailing list, please contact one or more of these services for more information. The list is posted on the eighth day of each month to the newsgroups comp.mail.misc, comp.mail.list-admin.software, comp.answers, and news.answers. It is also available from the following locations: - - send email to majordomo@edmonds.home.cs.ubc.ca with the single line "get faq ml-providers.txt" in the body of the message The mailing list software FAQ is available by sending mail to listserv@listserv.net with "GET MLM-SOFTWARE FAQ" in the body of the message. The following people have helped out in the creation of this list (excludin= g providers and people associated with them): Norm Aleks Roger Burns Franz Hemmer ------------------------------ Subject: Listserv lists From: Roger Burns The most widely used mailing list software is Revised Listserv, developed b= y Eric Thomas of L-Soft. Over 200 sites run Listserv mailing list software a= t no charge to the list-owners, and many may be willing to sponsor a list for you *if* your proposed topic strikes their interest. To find a Listserv sponsor, write up a draft proposal which describes the list you'd like to create and mail it to LSTSRV-L@SEARN.SUNET.SE. Mention in your message that you don't usually follow those discussion groups, so could responses please be mailed to your private address. Please only submit your proposal *once*. If someone is willing to host your list, then you will hear back from him or her. Repeated proposals for the same topic are only likely to annoy the readers of the list and may make them less likely to want to take on new lists. For more detailed advice on this process, send the command GET NEW-LIST CREATE as an e-mail message to the address LISTSERV@VM1.NODAK.EDU. For general documents explaining Listserv, send the following commands as a= n e-mail address to LISTSERV@SEARN.SUNET.SE: GET LISTPRES MEMO GET LISTSERV REFCARD GET LISTSERV MEMO For documents about running Listserv lists, send the following commands to that same address: GET LISTOWNR MEMO GET LISTOWNR REFCARD GET LISTSERV TIPS GET LISTKEYW MEMO ------------------------------ Subject: No-fee Providers Organization: Prodigy Services Corporation (prodigy.com) Email Contact: majordomo-owner@listserv.prodigy.com Web Contact: Software: Majordomo Status: free list support for certain topic areas Prodigy mailing lists are free and open to anyone. Many are related to ou= r communities, but any topic may be considered. We are currently accepting proposals for new lists, either moderated (like a newsletter) or unmoderated (like a discussion group). ------------------------------ Subject: For-fee Providers Company: ASHlists E-Mail List Services Email Contact: ASHandRR@TGN.net Software: MS; Qualcomm; Mead Status: for-fee service Specializes in bulk mailing services for non-commercial mailing lists such as e-mail zines; newsletters; discussion mailing list digests; and small output discussion mailing lists. There is a $10.00 non-refundable setup charge for all accounts. All subsequent fees are negotiable based on subscriber or mailing list size; frequency of mailing; and amount of administration duties required. Price= s can start as low as $5.00 a month for a once-a-month mailing of an e-mail zine to up to 200 subscribers. Subscriber bases are kept confidential and secure. Company: Brazerko Communications (brazerko.com) Email Contact: sales@brazerko.com Software: WaterGate Status: for-fee service We specialize in small discussion and announcement lists. We can also gat= e your list to a FidoNet or other FTN (Fido Technology Network) echo. Shareware authors are especially welcome! Company: Cantec Communications Email Contact: list-sales@cantec.com Software: NT-List and propietary mailing software Status: for-fee service Cantec Communications offers Internet-related services including mailing lists and mail related marketing and communication aids for businesses and community organizations. By using high-speed internet connections, maintaining low peak usage loads, and with ease of maintenance, we strive to provide the best and most cost-effective communications services available. Our prices start at $4.95 per month and vary depending upon the type of list and projected and actual usage. For more details, contact the addres= s listed above. Company: Capital Area Internet Service (cais.com) Email Contact: support@cais.com or list@andrew.cais.com Software: SmartList/custom Status: for-fee service Company: Digital Marketing (digimark.net) Email Contact: info@digimark.net Web Contact: Software: Majordomo Status: for-fee service Digital Marketing (DigiMark) offers a variety of value-added services to the Internet business community, including mailing lists and mailbots. We utilize Majordomo software for client-controlled listing and approval, and we support distributed mailing lists approval and moderation is handled off-site. Company: Esosoft Email Contact: info@md.esosoft.com, Sign up form: sign-up@md.esosoft.com Software: Majordomo 1.94.1 + enhancements Status: for-fee service Free 10-day trial period, Up to 2500 subscribers (see Pricing for larger lists), Majordomo 1.94.1 (newest version), Complete documentation for list management, Full Speed of two T-3 lines (45MBps), Usage Reports, Digests & Archives, Free unlimited e-mail support, No Setup Fee, Commercial use is allowed and much more. The price for such a list is $5 a month. Write to info-mailinglist@md.esosoft.com for more information. If your list needs a web site, too, you can get a WebSite with the following features: 5 MB of WebSpace (can be increased), WWW Address https://www.esosoft.com/yourname, Unlimited updates via your own FTP account, Microsoft Frontpage Support, Free E-mail address, Free updateable Autoresponder, Free 2 e-mail aliases to your e-mail address, Free E-mail forward Service, CGI-Local Directory, Server-Side-Included Scripts feature= , Option to create Password Protected Pages, Over 30 different Web page counters to track traffic, No Transfer Limits, Free unlimited e-mail support, No Setup Fee, Discounts on Mailing List Service, Commercial use i= s allowed and much more. The price for such a WebSite is $5 a month. Write to info-www@md.esosoft.com for more information. Company: Internet Business Access Group Email Contact: Sales@ibag.com Software: Majordomo Status: for-fee service The Internet Business Access Group provides mailboxes and mailing list services (using Majordomo software) at the following rates: Mailboxes: $25.00 setup (up to 5 mailboxes), $7.50/month/mailbox Mailing Lists: $25.00 setup, $15.00/month or $10.00/month when paid in 12 month blocks. Majordomo allows remote administrators to have a high degree of control over the managment of the mailing list. Company: L.O.F. Communications Email Contact: charlie@lofcom.com (Charlie Summers) Software: unknown Status: for-fee service Professional Internet mailing services, including Mailing Lists (one-way, discussion, and digest), AutoResponders, POP accounts, and re-directed accounts are available from L.O.F. Communications - for much less than you think! All accounts, unless otherwise requested, include a free listing on the Mailing List Sign-Up page at , to make it easier for your potential subscribers to join. For information on available services and our advantages, send mail to mailinfo@lofcom.com. For a current rate card on Mail Services, send mail to mailrates@lofcom.com. For a complete rate card, including Web Services= , send mail to siterates@lofcom.com. Your information will be returned within a few minutes. Company: L-Soft International, Inc (lsoft.com) Email Contact: sales@lsoft.com Web Contact: Software: LISTSERV Status: for-fee service L-Soft international Inc., the company that sells the authentic LISTSERV(TM) software for IBM mainframes, VMS, Unix, Windows NT and Window= s 95, also operates the largest LISTSERV site in the world, with 1,600,000 daily deliveries (DEC95, weekday average). L-Soft offers a full range of list hosting services, from low-budget hobby lists (non-commercial use only) starting as low as $8.00/month, to high-profile personalized solutions for businesses, with five levels of list management assistance t= o choose from. There is also a bulk service for very large lists with infrequent postings. L-Soft currently (DEC95) operates lists as large as 110,000 subscribers an= d has the technology to host lists of 1,000,000 members with response times of 0.2 sec or less for typical administrative requests (ADD, SUBSCRIBE, SIGNOFF, etc). Note that L-Soft is not an ISP and does not sell shell accounts, only mailing lists. Company: The Nerve Internet Service Email Contact: questions@thenerve.com Web Contact: Software: Majordomo Status: for-fee service US$75 per year. Flat rate regardless of the size of the list. Lists may not be used for unsolicited mailings. Company: North Star Technical Services (mystery.com) Email Contact: info@mystery.com Software: majordomo Status: for-fee service NSTS provides mailing list services using Majordomo software for $10/month or $100/year in advance. Majordomo allows remote administrators to have a high degree of control over the managment of the mailing list. Questions or comments can be sent to sales@mystery.com. Company: OnServices (MailCall.com) Email Contact: mailcall-info@mailcall.com or ray.daly@mailcall.com Status: for-fee service Software: custom Small mailing lists are our specialty, which we call MailCalls (tm). Families, girl scouts, clubs and sports fans use our service. We also provide autoresponse services (infobots) and cutomised services like email journals, diaries and catalogs. Internet mailing services are our only business. Unlike most companies, OnServices handles all of the administrative tasks for you. Small lists for as little as $20 per quarte= r after setup. Company: Rivertown.Net/Jar.Net Communications Ltd. Email Contact: support@rivertown.net Status: for-fee service Software: Smart-List (part of the Procmail package) Mailing lists provided for a $25 set up fee and $12.50 per month for up to 125 subscribers. Contact us for a custom quotation for larger lists. Prices scale up from 125 subscribers at the approximate rate of $0.10 per subscriber based upon peak monthly membership. Billed quarterly. Special arrangements available for not-for-profit groups. Company: Silverquick Communications Email Contact: sales@silverquick.com Status: for-fee service Software: NTList Silverquick Communications provide all forms of automated e-mail services, Mailing List Services, Auto-Responders, Document on Demand Servers, Electronic Newsletters. We try to offer a bespoke service and tailor the service to the customer needs. Our services are designed to pass as much control as is possible to the client. For many clients an important feature is the integration of automated emai= l and WWW with the ability to perform tasks like joining or leaving lists, updating auto-responder contents, post messages to the list by completing = a form on their own site. We can also use our list manager to perform specific tasks and projects on existing customer databases by e-mailing an= d segmenting responses to enabling better focused future mailings. We can host small or large lists so whatever you have in mind, please contact sales@silverquick.com if you would like to discuss our services. Company: SkyList, by SkyWeyr Technologies (skyweyr.com) Email Contact: sales@skyweyr.com Web Contact: Software: ListSTAR Status: for-fee service, some free service SkyList is proud to offer the most advanced mailing list hosting available today. Our list software was customized in-house to provide low maintanence, intuitive list hosting with a custom web interface. We specialize in large, corporate clients, although we have a number of smaller lists as well. Company: SparkNET's Majordomo Division Email Contact: chris@majordomo.com Web Contact: Software: Majordomo 1.94 Status: for-fee service SparkNET's Majordomo Division is a full blown organization, dedicated to rock-solid list-serving. Specializing in public discussion & annoucements lists, all list-owners receive a complimentary web-based interface, as wel= l as a personal list expert to contact when they need help. Company: SPENCER-DAVIS GROUP Phone Contact: (360) 786-1501 Email Contact: Robert_Kapela@spencer-davis.com or (360) 786-1501 Web Contact: Software: ListServ and ListProc Status: for-fee service The SPENCER-DAVIS GROUP is a leading provider of broadcast email, autoresponders, and mailing list hosting and administration services. If you would like more information about our services please visit our web page. Company: SportSurf.Net Email Contact: Moderator@sportsurf.net Software: Majordomo Status: for-fee service We offer those in the sports, fitness, health, reacreation and even entertainment industry Majordomo list services, chat rooms and web-boards. The services can be operational on a high-noise (advertising) or high-academic (pure peer review) basis. We are keen only to our target markets, but cover everything from A to Z in those markets. Furthermore, if you present us with the "qualified moderators" -- we'll host your list for a fraction of the cost that you'll pay the others. Sports is about teamwork and this service is about synergy. We have Unix, NT, and Mac services, bots too, on redundant T3 bandwidth. The fees are annual, pay-in-advance, -- but very modest. Sites include & . Company: Warwick Baker & Fiore (warwick.com) Phone Contact: (212) 941-4438 Email Contact: habs@warwick.com or (212)941-4438 Software: MailWeir Status: for-fee service Warwick has a system where we can run your mailing list of almost any size for a flat yearly fee of $100 to $200; if you have a very small or very large list call us for a custom quote. This includes both discussion and distribution lists. Mailbots can be created for an additional project fee. We use the MailWeir list software. Non-profits should contact us for special consideration. We can support lists that are fee based, if you are charging for access to your list. Warwick Baker & Fiore is a full service Ad agency based in NYC's Soho district. We have been in business for over 50 years. We can provide a ful= l range of Internet and traditional marketing and advertising services include direct mail, promotion, and national advertising. Company: Wharfedale Computers Email Contact: njh@smsltd.demon.co.uk Status: for-fee service Software: smoflist Included in the service: we provide publicity for the list, an archive of old articles, regular information to the list owner about new and lapsed users, WWW support and maintenance of the list. Company: World Data Network, Inc. Email Contact: sysop@wdn.com Web Contact: Status: for-fee service Software: Majordomo WDN has provided online services for the Washington, DC metropolitan area since 1984. We are a small company and our niche is unique in that we primarily work with small businesses and small associations. Our focus is on providing the individual service(s) needed by each individual client. Let us work with you to provide your online needs. All our servers are connected to the Internet by high speed connections. These servers have been up and running 99% of the time since installed. Downtime has consisted of time necessary to replace a defective power supply or to install additional memory. We provide dial-up Internet access and dedicated Internet access via high speed US Robotics modems including ISDN and 56k (X2). In addition, we provide www servers which virtual domain homepages, private domain e-mail and subdomain homepages. A number of companies use our office for the co-location of their servers. If you need an online mailing list, we can set one up for you within hours of receipt of your order. Typically the client (you) has total management of their own mailing list via e-mail commands. You can have either a public or private mailing list. The most important aspect of such a list is that it is virtually automatic and requires little of your valuable time. We can provide broadcast e-mail, auto-responders and interactive mailing lists. Company: xmission.com Email Contact: support@xmission.com Web Contact: Status: for-fee service Software: unknown We do provide mailing list services for a fee, (usually just the cost of a= n account with us) however, the setup is really something that we do after a= n account is set up with us. "Individual" account pricing: $19.00 per month, $17.00 per month for six months ($102) "Individual" account includes: UUCP mail/PPP/SLIP/CSLIP access for a single user Single user UUCP feed ------------------------------ [LINK][LINK] _________________________________________________________________ =20 [Previous] [Next] [Current Results] [Get Thread] [Author Profile] [Post] [Post] [Reply] _________________________________________________________________ =20 Home Power Search Post to Usenet Ask DN Wizard Help Why use DN? | Advertising Info | Press Releases | Jobs | Policy Stuff Copyright =A9 1995-97 Deja News, Inc. All rights reserved. From - Fri May 09 08:27:03 1997 >From grobe@netins.net Thu Apr 10 16:17:51 1997 Received: from worf.netins.net (grobe@worf.netins.net [167.142.225.4]) by ins6.netins.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id SAA26554 for ; Thu, 10 Apr 1997 18:16:45 -0500 (CDT) Date: Thu, 10 Apr 1997 18:16:45 -0500 (CDT) From: Jonathan Grobe To: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Email echo: alt.religion.bahai In-Reply-To: <199704101144.EAA07764@shadowfax.reference.com> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 10803 [Previous] [Next] [Current Results] [Get Thread] [Author Profile] [Post] [Post] [Reply] _________________________________________________________________ =20 Article 126 of 190 =20 Subject: NetNews/Mailing List Gateway Policy From: Jim McIntosh Date: 1997/03/13 Message-Id: <97072.152452JIM@auvm.american.edu> Newsgroups: bit.admin,news.answers [More Headers] Archive-name: bit/policy Last-modified: 1 July 1994 ************************************************************ *** General Information on Mailing List/Netnews gateways *** ************************************************************ This document gives general information on gateways between Electronic Mailing Lists and Netnews as implemented in Netnews version 2.5 by Linda Littleton at Penn State University. It includes guidelines on how to establish a new Mailing List/Netnews gateway. *** What are Electronic Mailing Lists? Electronic Mailing Lists are controlled by a software package called a Mailing List Mananger (or MLM). Since the most widely used MLM is called ListServ many people refer to electronic mailing lists as "Listserv lists". (Listserv, which stands for List Server, is a MLM that runs on VM/CMS, AIX, VMS, and other platforms. It is a product of LSoft, Inc. Write to sales@lsoft.com for more information on Listserv.) MLMs provide "mail-exploding" capabilities so that people with a common interest can communicate with each other by sending mail to a particular address (one address per mailing list), which then redistributes the mail to each person "subscribed" to the list. Each person subscribed to a particular list gets a copy of each piece of mail in their mailbox. *** What is Netnews? Netnews is a bulletin board system in which articles on a variety of topics are arranged in "newsgroups" and stored in a shared location from which individual users can read them. These newsgroups can be local newsgroups, available only at a user's site, or may be shared with other sites to form a world-wide bulletin board system called Usenet. *** What does the gateway do? The gateway software (which is a built-in part of the VM/CMS Netnews server from Penn State) puts each piece of mail for a particular list into a corresponding Netnews newsgroup and also sends each Netnews- originating posting to the newsgroup back to the mailing list. Generally gatewayed groups on Netnews are given the name bit.listserv.. When appropriate, the items in a mailing list might also be cross-posted to a "mainstream" Usenet group. *** Moderated or Unmoderated Newsgroup The newsgroup gatewayed to a list can be either moderated or unmoderated. If it is unmoderated, all posts are immediately accepted in the newsgroup and make their way eventually to the mailing list. If the newsgroup is moderated the posts are not accepted in the newsgroup, but instead sent through e-mail to a moderator address. This moderator can be a human being who decides if the post is appropriate, or can even be the mailing list address (where, for example, the list owner may from time to time set the list to "Send=3D Private" to limit the mail coming from Usenet to the mailing list). Whether the mailing list is edited is a separate decision from whether the newsgroup is moderated. Many unedited mailing lists are gatewayed to moderated newsgroups so the list owner can impose controls when and if inappropriate posts come from the newgroup to the mailing list. *** Why have a gateway? The major reason sites decide to carry gatewayed mailing lists is so their users can read these lists via shared disks, rather than requiring each user to receive each item to their mailbox. In addition, the gateway gives greater exposure and wider readership to the list since the list can be now be read by users at thousands of Usenet sites. *** The gateway can be LOCAL or GLOBAL On a per-group basis, the gateway can be either LOCAL (only users on the machine where Netnews is running will see the Listserv items) or GLOBAL (the Listserv items will propagate to other Usenet sites). To avoid problems that can be caused by multiple sites gatewaying the same group, we request that only a handful of sites set up global gateways and that other sites receive these groups through their normal news feeds. ******************************* *** AN IMPORTANT PRECAUTION *** ******************************* It is important that no more than one site per list set up a GLOBAL gateway. If more than one site does a GLOBAL gateway for a particular list, the list may get duplicates of some articles. It is the list owner's responsibility to make sure there are not multiple global gateways for the list and to "signoff" any suspect gateway site should problems start to occur. No GLOBAL gateway should ever be established without the express permission of the list owner. In the event that two sites did set up a global gateway for the same list, here is what might happen. If a user anywhere on the net posted an article to the group via Netnews and the article found its way to both of the global gateway sites, both of these sites would forward the article back to the mailing list. The mailing list would therefore receive two copies and although Listserv will usually detect the duplicate posting, it will return one of the copies to the author with a message saying that the post was a duplicate. Since the author only posted once, this will cause them some confusion. Also, it is possible that both posts would be distributed to the list if a MLM other than Listserv is controlling the mailing list. Netnews would not have a problem handling this (since it checks message-id's for duplicates), but it is the people who get the items in their mailboxes who would see two copies of the article. *** Gateway registration In order to avoid problems caused by multiple gateways, a list of gatewayed newsgroups is maintained by David Lawrence (tale@uunet.uu.net). This list is posted monthly to bit.admin, and copies are available from listserv@american.edu by sending the command GET NETGATE.GATELIST as the first and only line in the body of a piece of e-mail. This file is also available via anonymous ftp from ftp.american.edu. Please consult this list before establishing a gateway between a mailing list and a newsgroup to verify no gateway already exists. If you set up a gateway you should have it added to the list by writing to David Lawrence at tale@uunet.uu.net, or by writing to news-adm@american.edu. *** Setting up the gateway. The gateway is set up by having the Netnews service machine subscribe to the mailing list in the same way that a subscriber would. The MLM must ensure that each post has a unique Message-ID. If none is present in the incoming post, the MLM must add one. Also, the posts must come from some consistent address in the "Return-Path" (generally OWNER-). With LSoft's Listserv these requirements can be met by setting the FULLHDR option on (additionally the NOFILES option should be set, and NORENEW should be set if the list expires subscriptions). *** Guidelines for establishing a Mailing List/Netnews gateway. It is the responsibility of the person requesting the gateway to do the following: 1. Get the approval of the mailing list owner(s) and the MLM administrator at the host node. (For Listserv, send a "REVIEW listname" command to the Listserv at the host node for the names and addresses of the list owner(s), and a "RELEASE" command to the same address for the Listserv administor's name and address.) Send them each a copy of this document. If the list owner or MLM administrator objects, the gateway is not done. 2. Get the approval of the mailing list readers. This could be done somewhat informally by posting to the list and asking if there are objections. If the issue was controversial, a formal vote should be held according to the same guidelines as for creating a new Usenet group. If there was no major dissenting opinion a vote will not be needed. 3. If there is a Usenet group where crossposting would be logical, get the approval of the people who read that group (in the same way as approval of the mailing list readers was gotten). 4. Post to bit.admin to see if there are any objections. The subject of the posting should be "Gateway for under discussion". Explain briefly what the list is for. If you are proposing that the list be gated to something besides "bit.listserv.", this should be stated. Again, if there was no major dissenting opinion within seven days, a vote would not be needed; otherwise a vote would be held. Steps 2, 3, and 4 can all be done at the same time. 5. Write to news-admin@american.edu to say that all of the criteria have been met. Indicate the gateway site (if you wish some site besides auvm.american.edu to be the gateway), mailing list name, mailing list host node, list owner(s), and a short (45 character maximum) description of the list. News-admin will establish and/or register the gateway, and then post to bit.admin to say that the gateway is operational. The subject of the posting will be "Gateway for operational". If for some reason you cannot follow the steps outlined here (for example, if you do not get the bit groups, so cannot post to bit.admin), write to news-admin@american.edu to explain the situation. *** Where to address questions Questions about Listserv/Netnews gateways can be posted to bit.admin or sent to news-admin@american.edu. _________________________________________________________________ =20 [Previous] [Next] [Current Results] [Get Thread] [Author Profile] [Post] [Post] [Reply] _________________________________________________________________ =20 Home Power Search Post to Usenet Ask DN Wizard Help Why use DN? | Advertising Info | Press Releases | Jobs | Policy Stuff Copyright =A9 1995-97 Deja News, Inc. All rights reserved. From - Fri Jul 18 07:46:13 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Fri Jul 18 04:41:54 1997 Received: (qmail 3314 invoked from network); 18 Jul 1997 11:41:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.117) by hm3.hotmail.com with SMTP; 18 Jul 1997 11:41:52 -0000 Message-ID: <33CF56DD.4839@hotmail.com> Date: Fri, 18 Jul 1997 07:43:25 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: soc.religion.bahai CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Fairness References: <5qmhk0$slm@itchy.serv.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 1244 Juan R. I. Cole wrote: > [clip] > It is also extremely difficult to overcome the conventional view and to see > things with one's own eyes. Kohlberg sees this ability as > "post-conventional" and confines it to stages 5 and 6. (He gives Mahatma > Gandhi and Martin Luther King as examples of post-conventional ethical > thinking). Most people in any religion simply parrot what their leaders > say. The ability to think for oneself and to make a fair judgment that cuts > one off from the herd is not easily attained, nor does it bring one any > particular peace. But it is necessary to attain this individual view of > things in order to arrive at fairness or justice, and in order to become a > true trustee of God. Why should one suppose the Bahai Faith is any different from the past? On their deepest level, I don't believe Baha'u'llah's writings make such an assumption, and yet it prevails in certain quarters.... > > cheers > > Juan Cole > Department of History > University of Michigan > > https://www-personal.umich.edu/~jrcole/bahai.htm -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Fri Aug 01 08:32:34 1997 >From news@lacy.zippo.com Tue Jul 29 06:07:58 1997 Received: (from news@localhost) by lacy.zippo.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id GAA20971; Tue, 29 Jul 1997 06:06:34 -0700 (PDT) To: srb@bcca.org Path: newsp.zippo.com!news1 From: FG Newsgroups: soc.religion.bahai Subject: Re: Fairness Date: Tue, 29 Jul 1997 09:08:11 -0400 Organization: None Lines: 149 Message-ID: <33DDEB3B.7247@hotmail.com> References: <"aDl4FC.A.H_G.GsY2z"@bounty> Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com NNTP-Posting-Host: glaysher@199.179.42.119 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) CC: FG@hotmail.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 6346 dmcadam wrote: > > In answer to your last message : > > > fglaysher wrote: > >Why should one suppose the Bahai Faith is any different from the > >past? On their deepest level, I don't believe Baha'u'llah's writings > >make such an assumption, and yet it prevails in certain quarters.... > > From my limited perspective I would favor that the Writings do > indicate that the Baha'i Faith is different than any previous Dispensation. I don't believe Baha'u'llah Himself taught human nature itself would change.... Again, on the deepest level.... Anybody out there living in THIS world, as Baha'u'llah was? The context of my quoted comment above was in response to Juan Cole on fairness and justice.... Your shifting the context a little.... My > own personal belief is that Religion is One and it came in seed form, > with gradual developmental stages being motivated by each new > Revelation. > Now we have the complete fruit. Each stage is different yet part of > the > same religion of God. A received metaphor.... > > If I had to make a choice I would favor what the Manifestation says > rather than what an individual says. Alas, as individuals, we are limited in our perception of what they say.... What happens when many misperceive or fail to perceive the meaning of a Manifestation? To go back to Cole's original context, what then of the rare individual's conscience? As Baha'is I believe we need to > have this bias somehow put in the form of a postulate that we can > validate by our indpendent search for truth and reality. It is the > spirit of faith that is important for this is the faculty that enables > us to be taught by and enlightener. Indeed without the spirit of > faith we could not learn anything. This spirit is the major means of > learning by small children who believe everything their parents (God > to them) say and later, depending on their experiences and development > of rational consciousness, will either validate or invalidate what > parents teach. I would not argue this is "rational consciousness." No derogatory nuances intended.... Another subject in itself. > > Two researchers can take two different views and approaches and still > find the same truth eventually. One may simply be faster. > > This whole business of applying the principle of independent > investigation is quite tricky in that we all are conditioned to see, > feel and act in certain ways, some of which are highly irrational and > full of error. Once we acquire the needed virtues and develop to a > higher degree those conditions of purity of heart, chastity of soul > and freedom of spirit, we probably will begin to see, grasp, > understand and apply the Writings more realistically. Which makes freedom of religious conscience and opinion all the more essential. Otherwise, herd-like oppressive thinking takes over lowering and debasing everything it touches.... > > >From my perspective our main purpose in discussions, consultations, > >etc. > is to achieve love and unity. Truth is more important than love or unity.... Neither love nor unity, properly called, can exist with the truth, no matter how painful.... But if we keep on insisting on right > and wrong arguments we can easily fall into pro/con arguments and > become divisive. God cleaved the soul, not I.... So I accept what the Manifestation has revealed and > as interpreted by official interpretations of the Beloved Master and > the Guardian, and further expounded upon by the Counsellors as being > more closer to the the truth than my own perspective and then I seek > to validate what has been explained from this unified knowledge > between these Central Figures. No academic treatise thus far has > deterred my feelings about anything that has been revealed and > explained by this core body of knowledge derived from these Central > Figures. The Counsellors are not "Central Figures" to my knowledge.... To conceive of them as such is a serious error in my opinion.... Abdu'l-Baha says somewhere there is a difference between the innocent faith of little children and more mature, experienced faith. Cole's original post also touched on this fact. Your comments above seem to me to be more on the puerile side of the spectrum.... > > I realize that this is truly and act of faith, but in final analysis > faith is conscious knowledge and good deeds, not just dependent on > some academic view, as renowned as certain academics may be. Anti-intellectualism is a poison eating into the vitals of the Bahai Faith.... > > I mean no disrespect for academic opinions but I just don't see how > our limited minds, (the surrounders) can emcompass the totality of > existence and Revelation (the Surrounder) The Beloved Master said > that, "It is incumbent for men of understanding to translate that > which hath been written into reality and action." I don't recall any > Writings that say we should conclude from our limited minds that what > has been written is in error. Having become thoroughly confused in my > early Baha'i research from a purely intellectual approach I must, > after the last twenty years of faith, conclude that the postulates > derived from study of the Writings are true, beyond a shadow of a > doubt. This is because I tested them on myself and therefore cannot > prove them to others. It is our job to make knowledge accessible to > all hearts, serve all hearts and allow each to be independent. It is > not my position to say, Yea, or Nay about an interpretation of the > Central Figure of the Faith. I can only test them for myself, on > myself and having done so and proven they work I must accept them as > valid. I believe this kind of reasoning is woefully confused. The issue is not either/or.... And yet it has become so for many Bahais, like other fundamentalists.... > > Our station is one of Servitude not of authority. More of the same.... Cole's whole point revolved around a much more excruciatingly demanding conception of Servitude.... > > regards, > doug -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Fri Aug 01 08:32:36 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Tue Jul 29 06:06:39 1997 Received: (qmail 21950 invoked from network); 29 Jul 1997 13:06:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.119) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 29 Jul 1997 13:06:37 -0000 Message-ID: <33DDEB3B.7247@hotmail.com> Date: Tue, 29 Jul 1997 09:08:11 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: soc.religion.bahai CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Fairness References: <"aDl4FC.A.H_G.GsY2z"@bounty> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 6346 dmcadam wrote: > > In answer to your last message : > > > fglaysher wrote: > >Why should one suppose the Bahai Faith is any different from the > >past? On their deepest level, I don't believe Baha'u'llah's writings > >make such an assumption, and yet it prevails in certain quarters.... > > From my limited perspective I would favor that the Writings do > indicate that the Baha'i Faith is different than any previous Dispensation. I don't believe Baha'u'llah Himself taught human nature itself would change.... Again, on the deepest level.... Anybody out there living in THIS world, as Baha'u'llah was? The context of my quoted comment above was in response to Juan Cole on fairness and justice.... Your shifting the context a little.... My > own personal belief is that Religion is One and it came in seed form, > with gradual developmental stages being motivated by each new > Revelation. > Now we have the complete fruit. Each stage is different yet part of > the > same religion of God. A received metaphor.... > > If I had to make a choice I would favor what the Manifestation says > rather than what an individual says. Alas, as individuals, we are limited in our perception of what they say.... What happens when many misperceive or fail to perceive the meaning of a Manifestation? To go back to Cole's original context, what then of the rare individual's conscience? As Baha'is I believe we need to > have this bias somehow put in the form of a postulate that we can > validate by our indpendent search for truth and reality. It is the > spirit of faith that is important for this is the faculty that enables > us to be taught by and enlightener. Indeed without the spirit of > faith we could not learn anything. This spirit is the major means of > learning by small children who believe everything their parents (God > to them) say and later, depending on their experiences and development > of rational consciousness, will either validate or invalidate what > parents teach. I would not argue this is "rational consciousness." No derogatory nuances intended.... Another subject in itself. > > Two researchers can take two different views and approaches and still > find the same truth eventually. One may simply be faster. > > This whole business of applying the principle of independent > investigation is quite tricky in that we all are conditioned to see, > feel and act in certain ways, some of which are highly irrational and > full of error. Once we acquire the needed virtues and develop to a > higher degree those conditions of purity of heart, chastity of soul > and freedom of spirit, we probably will begin to see, grasp, > understand and apply the Writings more realistically. Which makes freedom of religious conscience and opinion all the more essential. Otherwise, herd-like oppressive thinking takes over lowering and debasing everything it touches.... > > >From my perspective our main purpose in discussions, consultations, > >etc. > is to achieve love and unity. Truth is more important than love or unity.... Neither love nor unity, properly called, can exist with the truth, no matter how painful.... But if we keep on insisting on right > and wrong arguments we can easily fall into pro/con arguments and > become divisive. God cleaved the soul, not I.... So I accept what the Manifestation has revealed and > as interpreted by official interpretations of the Beloved Master and > the Guardian, and further expounded upon by the Counsellors as being > more closer to the the truth than my own perspective and then I seek > to validate what has been explained from this unified knowledge > between these Central Figures. No academic treatise thus far has > deterred my feelings about anything that has been revealed and > explained by this core body of knowledge derived from these Central > Figures. The Counsellors are not "Central Figures" to my knowledge.... To conceive of them as such is a serious error in my opinion.... Abdu'l-Baha says somewhere there is a difference between the innocent faith of little children and more mature, experienced faith. Cole's original post also touched on this fact. Your comments above seem to me to be more on the puerile side of the spectrum.... > > I realize that this is truly and act of faith, but in final analysis > faith is conscious knowledge and good deeds, not just dependent on > some academic view, as renowned as certain academics may be. Anti-intellectualism is a poison eating into the vitals of the Bahai Faith.... > > I mean no disrespect for academic opinions but I just don't see how > our limited minds, (the surrounders) can emcompass the totality of > existence and Revelation (the Surrounder) The Beloved Master said > that, "It is incumbent for men of understanding to translate that > which hath been written into reality and action." I don't recall any > Writings that say we should conclude from our limited minds that what > has been written is in error. Having become thoroughly confused in my > early Baha'i research from a purely intellectual approach I must, > after the last twenty years of faith, conclude that the postulates > derived from study of the Writings are true, beyond a shadow of a > doubt. This is because I tested them on myself and therefore cannot > prove them to others. It is our job to make knowledge accessible to > all hearts, serve all hearts and allow each to be independent. It is > not my position to say, Yea, or Nay about an interpretation of the > Central Figure of the Faith. I can only test them for myself, on > myself and having done so and proven they work I must accept them as > valid. I believe this kind of reasoning is woefully confused. The issue is not either/or.... And yet it has become so for many Bahais, like other fundamentalists.... > > Our station is one of Servitude not of authority. More of the same.... Cole's whole point revolved around a much more excruciatingly demanding conception of Servitude.... > > regards, > doug -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Fri Aug 01 08:32:45 1997 >From dmcadam@together.net Wed Jul 30 11:17:24 1997 Received: from [206.231.25.244] (dial-15-ANX-WFVT-01.ramp.together.net [206.231.25.244]) by mx01.together.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id OAA27633; Wed, 30 Jul 1997 14:17:09 -0400 Message-Id: <199707301817.OAA27633@mx01.together.net> Subject: Re: Fairness Date: Wed, 30 Jul 97 14:21:05 -0400 x-mailer: Claris Emailer 2.0, March 15, 1997 From: dmcadam To: "Baha'i News List" cc: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 1996 In answer to your last message : Dear Fred- I appreciate your thoughts and "brutal honesty" but don't find anything in your argument to sway my opinions. To respond would maybe be misconstrued as hair-splitting arguments and possibly lead to a lack of respect and dignity of the soul and fear of God. To sum up I would say that feeling guilty or a blame attitude for what befalls us is rather sophmoric and something I cast off long ago when I looked in the mirror and took responsibility. The Faith is moving from unmitigated obscurity into active oppression but nobody can diminish my spirit, not even an army of intellectuals. To acquaint our religion to the conditions of former ones and society in decline to me is anti-intellectual for in reality we can only be suppressed if we give power to suppressors. The real oppressor is the ego and I do fear this in myself and am constantly on guard lest its subtle and devious ways infect my higher powers of perception and cause me to express my opinion in other than humbleness and diginity coupled with the fear of God. I do feel some pain at times from what happens in the community but suppression never. In fact the oppression is delicious and proves once again the infallibility of the Central Figures to me. I have never felt stronger than today when the forces of materialism and superstitions assault us on all sides and relish in the Justice and Mercy of God, not the fairness of individuals, although I will admit it would be perhaps more serene if we all learned to express our opinions with courtesy, tact and wisdom. But alas, this is our state at the moment and we must be patient with one another and with our community insitutions as was advised in the Indiv. Rights and Freedoms message so long ago. May your prayers be answered and you find that freedom you long for and which I feel constantly from being able to set forth my conscience. peace, doug From - Fri Aug 01 08:33:01 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Fri Aug 1 05:27:40 1997 Received: (qmail 26069 invoked from network); 1 Aug 1997 12:27:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.124) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 1 Aug 1997 12:27:38 -0000 Message-ID: <33E1D69A.24DC@hotmail.com> Date: Fri, 01 Aug 1997 08:29:14 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: soc.religion.bahai CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Fairness References: <"J_AtlD.A.tXH.w8O4z"@bounty> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 2552 dmcadam wrote: > > In answer to your last message : > > Dear Fred- > I appreciate your thoughts and "brutal honesty" but don't find anything > in your argument to sway my opinions. To respond would maybe be > misconstrued as hair-splitting arguments and possibly lead to a lack of > respect and dignity of the soul and fear of God. Wow! All THAT in a response.... > > To sum up I would say that feeling guilty or a blame attitude for what > befalls us is rather sophmoric and something I cast off long ago when I > looked in the mirror and took responsibility. The Faith is moving from > unmitigated obscurity into active oppression but nobody can diminish my > spirit, not even an army of intellectuals. To acquaint [sic] our religion to > the conditions of former ones and society in decline to me is > anti-intellectual for in reality we can only be suppressed if we give > power to suppressors. The real oppressor is the ego and I do fear this > in myself and am constantly on guard lest its subtle and devious ways > infect my higher powers of perception and cause me to express my opinion > in other than humbleness and diginity coupled with the fear of God. I'm not sure it's possible to respond to any of the above, given all the assumptions.... > > I do feel some pain at times from what happens in the community but > suppression never. In fact the oppression is delicious and proves once > again the infallibility of the Central Figures to me. I'm sure there are many Bahais who feel this way about "oppression," since it's so pervasive.... I have never felt > stronger than today when the forces of materialism and superstitions > assault us on all sides and relish in the Justice and Mercy of God, not > the fairness of individuals, although I will admit it would be perhaps > more serene if we all learned to express our opinions with courtesy, tact > and wisdom. But alas, this is our state at the moment and we must be > patient with one another and with our community insitutions as was > advised in the Indiv. Rights and Freedoms message so long ago. And you hold the high ground.... > > May your prayers be answered and you find that freedom you long for and > which I feel constantly from being able to set forth my conscience. None too lucidly, if you'll permit me to say so.... > > peace, > doug -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Fri Aug 01 08:32:59 1997 >From news@lacy.zippo.com Fri Aug 1 05:29:01 1997 Received: (from news@localhost) by lacy.zippo.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id FAA22515; Fri, 1 Aug 1997 05:27:35 -0700 (PDT) To: srb@bcca.org Path: newsp.zippo.com!news1 From: FG Newsgroups: soc.religion.bahai Subject: Re: Fairness Date: Fri, 01 Aug 1997 08:29:14 -0400 Organization: None Lines: 62 Message-ID: <33E1D69A.24DC@hotmail.com> References: <"J_AtlD.A.tXH.w8O4z"@bounty> Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com NNTP-Posting-Host: glaysher@199.179.42.124 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) CC: FG@hotmail.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 2552 dmcadam wrote: > > In answer to your last message : > > Dear Fred- > I appreciate your thoughts and "brutal honesty" but don't find anything > in your argument to sway my opinions. To respond would maybe be > misconstrued as hair-splitting arguments and possibly lead to a lack of > respect and dignity of the soul and fear of God. Wow! All THAT in a response.... > > To sum up I would say that feeling guilty or a blame attitude for what > befalls us is rather sophmoric and something I cast off long ago when I > looked in the mirror and took responsibility. The Faith is moving from > unmitigated obscurity into active oppression but nobody can diminish my > spirit, not even an army of intellectuals. To acquaint [sic] our religion to > the conditions of former ones and society in decline to me is > anti-intellectual for in reality we can only be suppressed if we give > power to suppressors. The real oppressor is the ego and I do fear this > in myself and am constantly on guard lest its subtle and devious ways > infect my higher powers of perception and cause me to express my opinion > in other than humbleness and diginity coupled with the fear of God. I'm not sure it's possible to respond to any of the above, given all the assumptions.... > > I do feel some pain at times from what happens in the community but > suppression never. In fact the oppression is delicious and proves once > again the infallibility of the Central Figures to me. I'm sure there are many Bahais who feel this way about "oppression," since it's so pervasive.... I have never felt > stronger than today when the forces of materialism and superstitions > assault us on all sides and relish in the Justice and Mercy of God, not > the fairness of individuals, although I will admit it would be perhaps > more serene if we all learned to express our opinions with courtesy, tact > and wisdom. But alas, this is our state at the moment and we must be > patient with one another and with our community insitutions as was > advised in the Indiv. Rights and Freedoms message so long ago. And you hold the high ground.... > > May your prayers be answered and you find that freedom you long for and > which I feel constantly from being able to set forth my conscience. None too lucidly, if you'll permit me to say so.... > > peace, > doug -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Thu May 22 06:12:51 1997 >From panuser@reference.com Tue May 20 03:15:01 1997 Received: (from panuser@localhost) by shadowfax.reference.com (8.8.5/8.8.4) id DAA03876; Tue, 20 May 1997 03:14:48 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 20 May 1997 03:14:48 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199705201014.DAA03876@shadowfax.reference.com> From: FG@hotmail.com Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,misc.misc,talk.religion.misc Cc: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: False divisions, false unity, and building References: <5lq916$5ki$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> Organization: Reference.Com Posting Service X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 2410 On Mon, 19 May 1997 21:44:51 +0100, Chris wrote: > It's good to see that the group is being used to discuss the Faith -- > thankyou Donald. I have been lurking a while as I have been preparing > two Baha'i Newsletters and rehearsing for the world premiere of a Gaelic > opera (which is almost an oxymoron -- or something!), not ot mention two > audits at work and sundry other diversions. :-) > > > In a message which I read on alt.religion.bahai, Donald Zhang Osborn > wrote > >False Unity: [clip] > > But there is also a core of believers who, though united, are basically > passive -- accepting the descisions of the Assembly but neither acting > on them or against them. They rarely participate in community > activities and may not be seen by the rest of the community from one > year's end to the other. But still we had a 90% poll for the election > of the new Assembly at Ridvan (those not voting having the excuse that > they did not even know 9 members of the community). [BTW, I am not > implying any criticism of these people -- most have valid reasons for > not being able to participate, and, of course, we do not know what they > do during those quiet moments that they have for contemplation.] You're describing every Bahai community I've ever lived in.... The most valid reasons people don't participate aren't known (to you at least) because no one is ever allowed to speak at "community" meetings unless it's to repeat the usual script.... The so-called "unity" is in reality imposed uniformity.... I can think of a recent example that was typical of the process... You're idealizing what you think their reasons might be. Many, I know from private conversations, feel contempt and disgust with the Bahais in "power" and control and are patiently awaiting a miracle to change the dismal state of the Bahai community.... > > ________________________________________________________________________ > Chris Manvell, Isle of Skye, Scotland. Tel.:+44+(0)1471-822317 Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai -- Posted using Reference.COM https://www.reference.com Browse, Search and Post Usenet and Mailing list Archive and Catalog. InReference, Inc. accepts no responsibility for the content of this posting. From - Thu May 22 06:12:52 1997 >From panuser@reference.com Tue May 20 03:15:01 1997 Received: (from panuser@localhost) by shadowfax.reference.com (8.8.5/8.8.4) id DAA03878; Tue, 20 May 1997 03:14:48 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 20 May 1997 03:14:48 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199705201014.DAA03878@shadowfax.reference.com> From: FG@hotmail.com Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,misc.misc,talk.religion.misc Cc: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: False divisions, false unity, and building References: <5lq916$5ki$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> Organization: Reference.Com Posting Service X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 2410 On Mon, 19 May 1997 21:44:51 +0100, Chris wrote: > It's good to see that the group is being used to discuss the Faith -- > thankyou Donald. I have been lurking a while as I have been preparing > two Baha'i Newsletters and rehearsing for the world premiere of a Gaelic > opera (which is almost an oxymoron -- or something!), not ot mention two > audits at work and sundry other diversions. :-) > > > In a message which I read on alt.religion.bahai, Donald Zhang Osborn > wrote > >False Unity: [clip] > > But there is also a core of believers who, though united, are basically > passive -- accepting the descisions of the Assembly but neither acting > on them or against them. They rarely participate in community > activities and may not be seen by the rest of the community from one > year's end to the other. But still we had a 90% poll for the election > of the new Assembly at Ridvan (those not voting having the excuse that > they did not even know 9 members of the community). [BTW, I am not > implying any criticism of these people -- most have valid reasons for > not being able to participate, and, of course, we do not know what they > do during those quiet moments that they have for contemplation.] You're describing every Bahai community I've ever lived in.... The most valid reasons people don't participate aren't known (to you at least) because no one is ever allowed to speak at "community" meetings unless it's to repeat the usual script.... The so-called "unity" is in reality imposed uniformity.... I can think of a recent example that was typical of the process... You're idealizing what you think their reasons might be. Many, I know from private conversations, feel contempt and disgust with the Bahais in "power" and control and are patiently awaiting a miracle to change the dismal state of the Bahai community.... > > ________________________________________________________________________ > Chris Manvell, Isle of Skye, Scotland. Tel.:+44+(0)1471-822317 Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai -- Posted using Reference.COM https://www.reference.com Browse, Search and Post Usenet and Mailing list Archive and Catalog. InReference, Inc. accepts no responsibility for the content of this posting. From - Thu May 22 19:34:30 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Thu May 22 13:46:42 1997 Received: (qmail 2144 invoked from network); 21 May 1997 10:58:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.119) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 21 May 1997 10:58:29 -0000 Message-ID: <3382D59E.16AD@hotmail.com> Date: Wed, 21 May 1997 06:59:42 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.bahai,soc.rights.human CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: False divisions, false unity, and building References: <5lq916$5ki$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <5lrtir$jck$1@bilbo.reference.com> <5lsnhg$fau@drn.zippo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 3241 Walter wrote: > > In article <5lrtir$jck$1@bilbo.reference.com>, FG@hotmail.com says... > > > >On Mon, 19 May 1997 21:44:51 +0100, Chris wrote: > > >> But there is also a core of believers who, though united, are basically > >> passive -- accepting the descisions of the Assembly but neither acting > >> on them or against them. They rarely participate in community > >> activities and may not be seen by the rest of the community from one > >> year's end to the other. But still we had a 90% poll for the election > >> of the new Assembly at Ridvan (those not voting having the excuse that > >> they did not even know 9 members of the community). [BTW, I am not > >> implying any criticism of these people -- most have valid reasons for > >> not being able to participate, and, of course, we do not know what they > >> do during those quiet moments that they have for contemplation.] > > > >You're describing every Bahai community I've ever lived in.... > >The most valid reasons people don't participate aren't known > >(to you at least) because no one is ever allowed to speak at > >"community" meetings unless it's to repeat the usual script.... > >The so-called "unity" is in reality imposed uniformity.... I > >can think of a recent example that was typical of the process... > > > >You're idealizing what you think their reasons might be. Many, > >I know from private conversations, feel contempt and disgust > >with the Bahais in "power" and control and are patiently > >awaiting a miracle to change the dismal state of the Bahai > >community.... > > > > I think Frederick is oversimplifying the issue here. Having lived in *many* > communities, each has had a distinct 'feel', not to mention their own issues, > problems, etc. to deal with. I have been in communities where love abounds > no matter what occurs, and communities where consultation is an extremely > painful thing to endure. Maybe you've just lived in more challenging places, > Fred? > > And about these individuals that feel "contempt and disgust" with certain > Baha'is "in power" - don't you think that "patiently awaiting" (i.e. not > actively trying to make a difference) in this sense is a little irresponsible? > If you think something is unjust, try to change it! To do otherwise is > hypocritical. Sometimes it can be the most responsible thing to do, given the fanaticism and self-righteousness of many who considered themselves touched by the hand of God.... I tried to create talk.religion.bahai, since I believe all avenues of communication are controlled and censored, but 600+ used their overwhelming numbers to preserve "unity." I don't believe it's hypocritical to wait for ignorant fanaticism to wake up and smell the coffee, so to speak.... Rather, it's hypocritical to talk about "unity" all the time while destroying it with coercion and sanitizing every thought or event, as is done in the American Bahai, a piece of propagandistic trash not worth reading and which regularly distorts reporting on Bahai activities. Such things to me are hypocritical.... > > walt -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Thu May 22 19:34:39 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Thu May 22 13:54:43 1997 Received: (qmail 5773 invoked from network); 22 May 1997 10:39:06 -0000 Received: from ts?rh.metronet.lib.mi.us (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.20) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 22 May 1997 10:39:06 -0000 Message-ID: <3384228F.4F4A@hotmail.com> Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 06:40:15 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc,soc.rights.human CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: False divisions, false unity, and building References: <5lq916$5ki$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <5lrtir$jck$1@bilbo.reference.com> <5lsnhg$fau@drn.zippo.com> <3382D59E.16AD@hotmail.com> <5lv74k$7ce@drn.zippo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 8186 Walter wrote: > > In article <3382D59E.16AD@hotmail.com>, Frederick says... > > > >Walter wrote: > >> > >> In article <5lrtir$jck$1@bilbo.reference.com>, FG@hotmail.com says... > >> > > >> >On Mon, 19 May 1997 21:44:51 +0100, Chris wrote: > >> > >> >> But there is also a core of believers who, though united, are basically > >> >> passive -- accepting the descisions of the Assembly but neither acting > >> >> on them or against them. They rarely participate in community > >> >> activities and may not be seen by the rest of the community from one > >> >> year's end to the other. But still we had a 90% poll for the election > >> >> of the new Assembly at Ridvan (those not voting having the excuse that > >> >> they did not even know 9 members of the community). [BTW, I am not > >> >> implying any criticism of these people -- most have valid reasons for > >> >> not being able to participate, and, of course, we do not know what they > >> >> do during those quiet moments that they have for contemplation.] > >> > > >> >You're describing every Bahai community I've ever lived in.... > >> >The most valid reasons people don't participate aren't known > >> >(to you at least) because no one is ever allowed to speak at > >> >"community" meetings unless it's to repeat the usual script.... > >> >The so-called "unity" is in reality imposed uniformity.... I > >> >can think of a recent example that was typical of the process... > >> > > >> >You're idealizing what you think their reasons might be. Many, > >> >I know from private conversations, feel contempt and disgust > >> >with the Bahais in "power" and control and are patiently > >> >awaiting a miracle to change the dismal state of the Bahai > >> >community.... > >> > > >> > >> I think Frederick is oversimplifying the issue here. Having lived in *many* > >> communities, each has had a distinct 'feel', not to mention their own issues, > >> problems, etc. to deal with. I have been in communities where love abounds > >> no matter what occurs, and communities where consultation is an extremely > >> painful thing to endure. Maybe you've just lived in more challenging places, > >> Fred? > >> > >> And about these individuals that feel "contempt and disgust" with certain > >> Baha'is "in power" - don't you think that "patiently awaiting" (i.e. not > >> actively trying to make a difference) in this sense is a little irresponsible? > >> If you think something is unjust, try to change it! To do otherwise is > >> hypocritical. > > > >Sometimes it can be the most responsible thing to do, given the > >fanaticism and > >self-righteousness of many who considered themselves touched by the hand > >of > >God.... > > I understand your point, but I myself don't see it as a reason to sit back and > "wait for the weather to change". Take yourself, for example. Though I may > not agree with everything you say (and heck, NOONE agrees with us ALL the time, > right?), you at least are trying to make a difference, in the best way that > you see how. I can't blame you for at least trying! Actually, I respect such Bahais. They're often much more moderate and balanced people than the breathless enthusiasts who are always trying to whip others into frenetic actitivity.... > > > I tried to create talk.religion.bahai, since I believe all > >avenues of > >communication are controlled and censored, but 600+ used their > >overwhelming > >numbers to preserve "unity." > > From what I understood, it was a few individuals who widely distributed biased > opinions on the matter, and the great majority most likely voted without > adequately understanding the voting criteria. Definitely could be seen as a > "sheep" effect, though. > > It's interesting. This kind of thing seems to happen in e-mail, at least, so > very often, and not with just Baha'is. I have had to repeatedly debunk > virus alerts which turned out to be hoaxes, pleas for this cause or that > cause which were either faked or totally outdated - the list goes on. > > In this sense, people do seem to blindly accept any "reasonable sounding" > information that comes their way, and then feel obligated to immediately > forward it to their widest list of distribution. So, I constantly try to tell > people to "GO TO THE SOURCE!!!" rather than to just take the word of some > document that, even though it may have been forwarded by someone with good > intent, could cause all kinds of harm. > > Though I personally haven't seen this effect as widely in the Baha'i "sphere" > (tho I'm not saying it doesn't exist - we live in different places), I do > know that it does happen. You wouldn't believe some of the crazy notions > that get passed upon as "reasonable" and "a great idea" (well - I guess you > WOULD believe!), only to have everyone later say "what in God's name were > we thinking?". Oh yes, I believe it! And the more gun-ho the crowd, the wilder the ideas become.... This is actually one of the things that has concerned me all along.... > > I hope that the problems we have now (and yes, we DO have problems) will > eventually get ironed out, whereupon I'm sure we'll have another whole set of > other problems to overcome. We have a great Faith, but our relative > "stupidities" (that's inclusive) tends to get in the way. Crudely speaking, > I pray that the Baha'i Faith will in time make us less "stupid". I do too, but I have my doubts.... > > >I don't believe it's hypocritical to wait > >for > >ignorant fanaticism to wake up and smell the coffee, so to speak.... > > Ok, maybe not hypocritical. I guess prefer the method of "greasing the gears". > To quote from Gilbert & Sullivan's "Pirates of Pennzance": > > "Speak out! I charge you by that sense of conscientiousness to which we have > never yet appealed in vain!" There are many good reasons not to "grease the gears." One is that it is obvious to anyone with any sensitivity at all who's really in control. That's enough to cause many thoughtful people not to get involved. > > >Rather, > >it's hypocritical to talk about "unity" all the time while destroying it > >with coercion and sanitizing every thought or event, as is done in the > >American Bahai, a piece of propagandistic trash not worth reading and > >which > >regularly distorts reporting on Bahai activities. Such things to me are > >hypocritical.... > > > > Granted! I've sometimes seen a lack of 'objective' reporting there as well. > It's something I hope we can improve upon in the publication, or start another > paper, or the like. Other avenues of journalism and communication have been tried with sad results.... There's a systemic problem.... The sacchrine banality of the American Bahai is obviously company policy.... There and on soc.religion.bahai.... > > Have you ever attempted to write them about this topic, or send an article > addressing it? It would be interesting to hear the response, if any. It would probably be along the lines of what happened to Dialogue.... > > I can understand how there is a great reluctance to publish actual incident > information publicly, however. The secular press just barely skirts the libel > issue (and just barely) by prepending "accused", "suspect", etc. to their > news stories. And the effect is that a large part of the population reads > that and immediately says "Yup. Let's hang him/her." (see above argument > about e-mail sheep). What happened to innocent until proven guilty? Just > another case of what happens when dumb humans are running the show. Yes, only cheerful, upbeat, "inspiring" rhetoric allowed.... > > Now the bees, THEY got a working system! ;-) It's based on instinct. We human beings, as Aristotle pointed out, are political beings.... We must create a polity that strives to promote justice and order. The Bahai system has very profound flaws in it as this time, perhaps never to be remedied.... > > walt -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Thu May 22 19:34:25 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Thu May 22 13:48:54 1997 Received: (qmail 2161 invoked from network); 21 May 1997 11:05:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.119) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 21 May 1997 11:05:34 -0000 Message-ID: <3382D748.1C42@hotmail.com> Date: Wed, 21 May 1997 07:06:48 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,misc.misc,talk.religion.misc Subject: Re: False divisions, false unity, and building References: <5lq916$5ki$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <5lrtir$jck$1@bilbo.reference.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 3281 Chris wrote: > > In a message which I read on alt.religion.bahai, FG@hotmail.com > wrote > >> But there is also a core of believers who, though united, are basically > >> passive -- accepting the descisions of the Assembly but neither acting > >> on them or against them. They rarely participate in community > >> activities and may not be seen by the rest of the community from one > >> year's end to the other. But still we had a 90% poll for the election > >> of the new Assembly at Ridvan (those not voting having the excuse that > >> they did not even know 9 members of the community). [BTW, I am not > >> implying any criticism of these people -- most have valid reasons for > >> not being able to participate, and, of course, we do not know what they > >> do during those quiet moments that they have for contemplation.] > > >You're describing every Bahai community I've ever lived in.... > >The most valid reasons people don't participate aren't known > >(to you at least) because no one is ever allowed to speak at > >"community" meetings unless it's to repeat the usual script.... > >The so-called "unity" is in reality imposed uniformity.... I > >can think of a recent example that was typical of the process... > > In that case you really have a problem. In our community the passive > believers are the ones who are remote from the main body of the > community (like 50 odd miles on single track roads) or have spouses that > are very antagonistic to the Faith. Sometimes they're "antagonistic" for very good reasons.... such as perceiving the ignorant fanaticism of some Bahais, how the Faith can be controlled basically by a small clique of Iranian Bahais, or others, the self-righteous disdain of "prominent" Bahais, etc.... But, as you say, we cannot (and > must not) judge why these people are the way they are. Sometimes they > are better Baha'is than the ones who appear to be doing all the work. I've never detected any true reluctant on the part of most Bahais to judge the "spirituality" of other Bahais.... In fact, the local hierarchy usually revolves around exactly this kind of thing.... on a very low order.... > > But the second part of your paragraph most definitely does not apply to > any community I know of in the UK (apart from one, and that is > changing). Ahhh, mmmm. One? Those communities I have visited all are very open in > accepting the input of the believers, including children, at Feasts and > then acting on it appropriately. As long as they repeating the "script" would be my guess.... > > >You're idealizing what you think their reasons might be. Many, > >I know from private conversations, feel contempt and disgust > >with the Bahais in "power" and control and are patiently > >awaiting a miracle to change the dismal state of the Bahai > >community.... > > Again, I can only say that that is not my experience, but I have met > only with UK and Bahamian communities, the US seems to be different, > sorry. > > All the best, > ________________________________________________________________________ > Chris Manvell, Isle of Skye, Scotland. Tel.:+44+(0)1471-822317 -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Fri May 23 07:48:31 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Fri May 23 04:06:11 1997 Received: (qmail 15780 invoked from network); 23 May 1997 11:06:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.122) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 23 May 1997 11:06:09 -0000 Message-ID: <33857A6C.449C@hotmail.com> Date: Fri, 23 May 1997 07:07:24 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,misc.misc,talk.religion.misc Subject: Re: False divisions, false unity, and building References: <5lq916$5ki$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <5lrtir$jck$1@bilbo.reference.com> <3382D748.1C42@hotmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 4441 Chris wrote: > > In a message which I read on alt.religion.bahai, Frederick Glaysher > wrote > >Chris wrote: > >> In that case you really have a problem. In our community the passive > >> believers are the ones who are remote from the main body of the > >> community (like 50 odd miles on single track roads) or have spouses that > >> are very antagonistic to the Faith. > > >Sometimes they're "antagonistic" for very good reasons.... such as > >perceiving the ignorant fanaticism of some Bahais, how the Faith can > >be controlled basically by a small clique of Iranian Bahais, or others, > >the self-righteous disdain of "prominent" Bahais, etc.... > > Maybe so, though that is not the case here. To quote one example: One > husband is an atheist. He might have tolerated a Christian wife because > that is the sort of "respectable" and the norm here -- but a wife who > is a Baha'i? He's quite happy with the principles, it's the "God" bit > he opposes; it would have been just as bad if she had become a Muslim, > or a Hindu, etc. Another example is a wife whose husband is a retired > priest. Somewhere in the Writings 'Abdu'l-Baha says that the unity of > tha family must come before one's practice of the Faith, but in putting > this first, one can look like a passive Baha'i, however much one loves > Baha'u'llah. These aren't at all the examples I cite above, though these situations occur too.... > > >But, as you say, we cannot (and > >> must not) judge why these people are the way they are. Sometimes they > >> are better Baha'is than the ones who appear to be doing all the work. > > > >I've never detected any true reluctant on the part of most Bahais to > >judge the "spirituality" of other Bahais.... In fact, the local > >hierarchy usually revolves around exactly this kind of thing.... on a > >very low order.... > > This is very much the opposite of my experience. If anything, most of > the Baha'is (not all) that I have met bend over backwrds to try not to > judge the spirituality of others (Christ's bit about "beams" and "motes" > comes to mind, and "Judge not that ye be not judged). As for > Assemblies, well I do have less experience here as I have only served on > one, but again, I cannot remember any occasion where an individual has > been "judged". There may be concern about the spiritual (or temporal) > welfare of an individual, but not in the sense of condemning them. I'm > not denying that it happens, but I do not see all around the Scottish, > or UK, community. No, in this world, no one would ever judge anyone else.... Myself included.... > > >> But the second part of your paragraph most definitely does not apply to > >> any community I know of in the UK (apart from one, and that is > >> changing). > > > >Ahhh, mmmm. One? > > Yes, just one. And, as I wrote, that one is changing as new members > have been voted onto it. > > >Those communities I have visited all are very open in > >> accepting the input of the believers, including children, at Feasts and > >> then acting on it appropriately. > > > >As long as they repeating the "script" would be my guess.... > > I guess that what you mean is what we call the "party line"? Well, we > have a couple of "mavericks" in our community and some of the best ideas > that our Assembly has supported has come from these people. Every idea > put forward by a member of the community (including, as I wrote, > children, as well as the mavericks) is considered by the Assembly. > Again, I am sure there are communities where this does not happen, but > of those communities I know, they are certainly in a very small > minority. > > Best wishes, > ________________________________________________________________________ > Chris Manvell, Isle of Skye, Scotland. Tel.:+44+(0)1471-822317 > YOU WILL NEED TO REMOVE "SPAMGUARD" FROM ADDRESS BEFORE E-MAILING ME. > Verily, Jesus said: "Come ye after Me, and I will make you to become > fishers of men." In this day, however, We say: "Come ye after Me, that > We may make you to become quickeners of mankind." [Baha'u'llah] > For more info goto: https://www.miracles.win-uk.net/Bahai > https://www.fragrant.demon.co.uk/bahai.html > or my embryonic web site at -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Tue May 27 07:54:05 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Tue May 27 04:31:26 1997 Received: (qmail 3161 invoked from network); 27 May 1997 11:31:22 -0000 Received: from softdnserror (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.20) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 27 May 1997 11:31:22 -0000 Message-ID: <338AC605.6B99@hotmail.com> Date: Tue, 27 May 1997 07:31:17 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,misc.misc,talk.religion.misc,soc.rights.human CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: False divisions, false unity, and building References: <5lq916$5ki$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <5lrtir$jck$1@bilbo.reference.com> <3382D748.1C42@hotmail.com> <33857A6C.449C@hotmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 1725 Posted with permission: Subject: Re: a thought Date: Fri, 23 May 1997 06:42:55 -0400 From: FG > Dear Fred, > > I don't know if you know me, but I contributed to Irfan for a while. > I'm one of your "yes" votes, too. I'm not a Baha'i, but I'm married > to Frank Baker. [....] My view of > the Baha'i Faith and community began as neutral about 10 years ago > and has gone steadily downhill ever since. I think the problems go very deep. > I won't list the problems, as they would not be news to you, but I watch > in horror as you continue to take the punishment. It seems to me that > others have been able to come to terms and go on in a more peaceful way > (Juan is a good example). Wouldn't it be healthier for you to walk away > and find spiritual, intellectual, and social fulfillment elsewhere? I could never take the route that Cole has.... I began my intellectual development as a young man reading Emerson and his struggles with the church.... I quite rationally left the Catholic church I was born into. I can't and won't go backwards. I believe quite deeply in the Bahai Faith. It's the way, historically, it's been interpreted by some that I find problematic.... > The good people, e.g., Susan Maneck and others, will still be your friends, > and you will be free from the [....] > You don't need this tsuris (grief)! Just a vent/thought! I could never walk away, you see.... It's to the bitter end for me.... Life is full of grief; I don't expect ever to be free of it. There are duties more important than the evasion of grief.... > > Fran -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Thu May 29 07:52:31 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Thu May 29 03:28:05 1997 Received: (qmail 24541 invoked from network); 29 May 1997 10:25:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.121) by hm2.hotmail.com with SMTP; 29 May 1997 10:25:50 -0000 Message-ID: <338D59F8.6451@hotmail.com> Date: Thu, 29 May 1997 06:27:04 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,misc.misc,talk.religion.misc,soc.rights.human,soc.culture.israel,soc.culture.irania n CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: False divisions, false unity, and building References: <338AC605.6B99@hotmail.com> <1997May28.193136.26443@leo.vsla.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 2530 K. Paul Johnson wrote: > > Believing in something as it was originally intended, but not > as it has developed historically, is not uncommon. Movements > start out with liberation and enlightenment as their > objectives; within a few generations oppression and > anti-intellectualism predominate. Christianity is a prime > example, although some groups (even within the Roman Catholic > church) have recaptured the original "liberationist" ethos to > some degree. Indeed, it's the human comedy.... and may be no different for the Bahai Faith.... > > It seems to me an exercise in self-punishment to "hang on till > the bitter end" in an organization where one is clearly not > wanted. Leaving such an organization and joining one that is > much more liberal and tolerant has been one of the best things > I've done in recent years. I could never go backwards, though, you see.... I love Christ, Muhammad, Buddha, and all the great prophets of transcendence.... Alas, it's the lying scum that came after them that keeps me away.... and the insularity of each historical dispensation.... > > Juan Cole has made the point that the Unitarian Universalists > represent better the true humanitarian and broadminded spirit > of Baha'u'llah and `Abdu'l Baha than their own soi-disant > followers do. I think this is true. I think it's probably true too.... I began my conscious intellectual, spiritual life, though, with Emerson and all of his concerns.... I can't go back in that direction. It wouldn't be honest. I've passed through the crucible of nihlism, every excruciating, liberating chamber, and yet believe in Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha.... Pity, in a sense, it didn't end there.... > > Fred, how can you get around the fact that the main reason the > Baha'i Faith is ruined is Shoghi Effendi's authoritarianism > (within the Baha'i community) and totalitarianism (in > his idea of how future society will be dominated by Baha'i > theocracy)? It's not just current elected officials who have > brought things to their present deplorable state. You may be right. Of course, in all honesty, such ideas have occurred to me during my own experience and study of his books; how could it not.... I hope, perhaps foolishly, that the historical pattern will swing back, resurrecting the early tolerance and universalism of the Founders.... Perhaps the Universal House of Justice will live up to its name.... -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Sun Jun 01 09:54:41 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Fri May 30 10:25:12 1997 Received: (qmail 26297 invoked from network); 30 May 1997 17:25:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.128) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 30 May 1997 17:25:10 -0000 Message-ID: <338F0D84.7B34@hotmail.com> Date: Fri, 30 May 1997 13:25:24 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,misc.misc,talk.religion.misc,soc.rights.human,soc.culture.israel,soc.culture.irania n CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: False divisions, false unity, and building References: <338D59F8.6451@hotmail.com> <1997May30.134610.6669@leo.vsla.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 2563 K. Paul Johnson wrote: > > Frederick Glaysher writes: > > > > I could never go backwards, though, you see.... I love Christ, > > Muhammad, Buddha, and all the great prophets of transcendence.... > > Alas, it's the lying scum that came after them that keeps me > > away.... and the insularity of each historical dispensation.... > > > Christianity and Buddhism seem to be a lot less insular than > the rest. Christians by and large have gotten over believing > that theirs is the only path to God (at least in the US, > according to surveys.) I became a Baha'i as a teenager and > after leaving it aat 20 had little interest in returning to > Christianity. It's only recently that I have been able to see > how much Christianity constantly renews itself. It is really > the "newest" of the world religions in that it has been so > transformed in the 20th century as to make it more au courant > with the times than the "newer" Baha'i, Sikhism, or Islam. I've studied Sikhism a little, mostly Kabir.... I love much of the literature of Islam but think it's a shame the cultures that have responded to it have so little to recommend themselves to others.... > > Especially the spate of books on the historical Jesus give me > hope that Christianity in the 21st century will continue to > have more intellectual and spiritual vitality than the other > world religions. There have been over 80,000 books published > about Jesus, less than 20,000 about Muhammad, less than 10,000 > about Buddha, less than 500 about Baha'u'llah. Which shows that > people today are still thinking about him, feeling about him, more > than anyone else in religious history. Frankly, I believe Christianty's knowledge of evil and suffering is superior to the other religions.... the Bahai Faith included, or at least as interpreted, unfortunately.... It too is more intellectually alive.... The Bahai Faith, in that regard, is stone dead and always has been with the exception of a very few people.... and probably always will be stone dead given recent evidence.... I respect your conscience. I've spent much time, a pleasure to remember, reading the Old and New Testaments, with formal study of the Old Testament prophets, Paul, and Augustine.... I've known so many good, tolerant, moderate Christians who have lived decent, praiseworthy lives.... I think of my father-in-law, now on his deathbed, having set eight-one years of exemplary living, by and large.... -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Sun Jun 01 09:54:46 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Fri May 30 10:37:18 1997 Received: (qmail 26344 invoked from network); 30 May 1997 17:37:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.128) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 30 May 1997 17:37:04 -0000 Message-ID: <338F105A.53DE@hotmail.com> Date: Fri, 30 May 1997 13:37:30 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc,soc.culture.iranian,talk.religion.buddhism,alt.religion.islam CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: False divisions, false unity, and building References: <338D59F8.6451@hotmail.com> <1997May30.134610.6669@leo.vsla.edu> <5mmv84$9sb@drn.zippo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 3565 jeff wrote: > > In article <1997May30.134610.6669@leo.vsla.edu>, pjohnson@leo.vsla.edu says... > > > >Frederick Glaysher writes: > >> > >> I could never go backwards, though, you see.... I love Christ, > >> Muhammad, Buddha, and all the great prophets of transcendence.... > >> Alas, it's the lying scum that came after them that keeps me > >> away.... and the insularity of each historical dispensation.... > >> > >Christianity and Buddhism seem to be a lot less insular than > >the rest. Christians by and large have gotten over believing > >that theirs is the only path to God (at least in the US, > >according to surveys.) I became a Baha'i as a teenager and > >after leaving it aat 20 had little interest in returning to > >Christianity. It's only recently that I have been able to see > >how much Christianity constantly renews itself. It is really > >the "newest" of the world religions in that it has been so > >transformed in the 20th century as to make it more au courant > >with the times than the "newer" Baha'i, Sikhism, or Islam. > > Rather, it is really the "newest" of the world religions in that it > has been so transformed in the 20th century as to make it more > "politically correct" with the times.... Progress or assimilation, you seem to evoke.... Perhaps a little of both.... > > And this transformation hasn't been across the board, only with a > few *sects* of Christianity. I'm not sure I'd agree with you here.... > > Don't get me wrong, there's absolutely nothing wrong with > promoting tolerance! In that sense I think they are finally > catching on to the original intent of "Love Thy Neighbor", etc. > > But you must also consider the social clime in which a religion > undergoes transformation. I think this has been happening from the > very beginning of the formation of the United States, and maybe it > has only been increasing in a logarithmic scale. > > But... is what we decide for ourselves as "right" or "good", *really* > right and good? Very (unspiritual) democratic approach, yes? Well, > why, then, when a new Teacher comes, is it such a test to the people > and practices of the time? Where do we go wrong? > > We go wrong because we are fallible. That is why the Teacher is sent, > to continue the lesson. And while some may pass the grade, many others, > unfortunately, flunk the lesson. What of those who "cheat" to pass the "lesson"? > > > > >Especially the spate of books on the historical Jesus give me > >hope that Christianity in the 21st century will continue to > >have more intellectual and spiritual vitality than the other > >world religions. There have been over 80,000 books published > >about Jesus, less than 20,000 about Muhammad, less than 10,000 > >about Buddha, less than 500 about Baha'u'llah. Which shows that > >people today are still thinking about him, feeling about him, more > >than anyone else in religious history. > > These facts are obvious and somewhat irrelevant, especially when you > consider the number of Christians in the world. These definitely seem > to correspond with 'enrolled' numbers in these Faiths, with the > exception of Islam. Muslims probably have not had the chance to churn > out so much publications (and quantity has nothing to do with quality) > due to the lack of religious interpretational freedom. What an awkward phrase for religious freedom of conscience and free speech.... > > jeff -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Fri May 30 07:36:58 1997 >From ncwright@earthlink.net Fri May 30 04:01:47 1997 Received: from LOCALNAME (ip19.philadelphia7.pa.pub-ip.psi.net [38.26.63.19]) by italy.it.earthlink.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id EAA11100 for ; Fri, 30 May 1997 04:01:44 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <338ED122.208E@earthlink.net> Date: Fri, 30 May 1997 06:07:46 -0700 From: "Nona C. Wright" Reply-To: ncwright@earthlink.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win16; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,misc.misc,talk.religion.misc,soc.rights.human To: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: False divisions, false unity, and building References: <5lq916$5ki$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <5lrtir$jck$1@bilbo.reference.com> <3382D748.1C42@hotmail.com> <33857A6C.449C@hotmail.com> <338AC605.6B99@hotmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 1036 Frederick Glaysher wrote: > I could never walk away, you see.... It's to the bitter end for me.... > Life is full of grief; I don't expect ever to be free of it. There > are duties more important than the evasion of grief.... Ahh.. Fred, now this I can relate to. In all of my ups and downs as a Baha'i, most because of my own character problems and struggles, and some because of the immaturity and struggles of the Baha'i community to become what it needs to become, I have never lost sight of the Big Picture, which is that I believe deep in my heart and soul that Baha'u'llah was who He said He was. We are both in for the long haul where ever that leads us. Fred you know I am not always comfortable with the way you choose to express yourself, but have to agree with you that the pot definitly needs to be stirred. And I do have faith that in the long run that we will get to where we need to be. Wish sometimes I could visit the future and see what history has to say about this period of time. Nona From - Thu May 22 06:12:57 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Tue May 20 03:52:43 1997 Received: (qmail 17584 invoked from network); 20 May 1997 10:51:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.121) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 20 May 1997 10:51:02 -0000 Message-ID: <3381825D.21DB@hotmail.com> Date: Tue, 20 May 1997 06:52:13 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,misc.misc,talk.religion.misc,soc.culture.israel,soc.culture.iranian,soc.rights.huma n,alt.religion CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: False divisions, false unity, and building "Unity in Diversity" References: <5lq916$5ki$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 5209 Donald Zhang Osborn wrote: > > False Divisions, False Unity, and Building Unity in Diversity > > On the Usenet recently there has been a bit of bashing of > the Baha'i community for certain faults perceived by one or > another person, including dismissing its unity as "superficial" > and attempting to negatively categorize different types of > Baha'is. While no one would claim that the Baha'i community is > perfect, I would like to put such notions into a different and > hopefully constructive perspective. > > False Divisions: > > Differences in opinions, interests, likes & dislikes are > part of social reality (however constructed or perceived). Seen > as diversity these differences are a source of strength. > Diversity in strengths, needs, experience need to be understood > and appreciated as part of community growth and development. The reality in Bahai communities, though, is that such diversity is not accepted but suppressed and measured against a narrowly defined understanding of what a "true" Bahai should be doing, thinking, etc.... > On the other hand, when differences are used to describe > divisions or categories, there is the danger of constructing > false divisions: e.g., "this nationality thinks this way (unlike > us)"; "most of the community is ignorant (unlike some other > group)"; there is "this kind" vs. "that kind" of Baha'i; etc. The reality is there are fundamental differences between the way nationalities think, live, etc.... These aren't "false" divisions, these are REAL divisions.... > Emphasizing differences, IMHO, only helps if it leads to the > larger goals of unity and justice (whose purpose is the > appearance of unity). Unity and justice, in whose opinion? If injustice serves the cause of justice is it just? Many Bahais seem to think so, I believe. And this has to be done with utmost tact > and in observance of the high standards of communication set > forth in the Writings if it is to have any hope of achieving such > a positive end. > Portraying perceived differences as more fundamental > divisions in the community cannot, IMHO, serve any positive end, > especially when it involves characterizing other people. In any > event, one risks creating a false division--a construction that > does not reflect any significant reality--and something that does > not promote unity or justice, but rather confuses and alienates. Ignoring and distorting the fundamental differences serves no purpose except the aggrandizing of control in the hands of those who want it.... They never hesitate to characterize other people when it serves their purposes.... [clip] > > False Unity: > > Building unity is not easy. Yet it is central to this Faith > and we must make our utmost efforts to achieve it. > [clip] > Sometimes, since we are far from perfect, the results in a > given area might strike one as being "superficial." Yet if the > unity in a locality or of the community in a larger area seems > less than ideal, two steps are important: 1) recognize that this > is not shameful but a functional step, and 2) that it requires > awareness and work, not accusations. > M. Scott Peck, in his book _The Different Drum: Community > Making and Peace_ (1987, p. 86ff), discusses something called > "pseudocommunity" where people come together with a common idea > and things work out well on a superficial level. This he > considers a step towards developing a true community. > Indeed, a couple of Baha'is have developed a community > development program employing this concept (which they call > "false unity") and a number of other ideas, using Baha'i > approaches to enhance community unity. A very interesting model > that has had positive results in a number of communities. > Although "false unity" is not the ideal, and one would not > suggest to be satisfied with it, it is important not to minimize > the significance of that limited achievement in as remarkably > diverse a community as we are. It is a necessary first step, if > you will, and seen as such encourages us to take more steps. False unity, in my experience, is the only "unity" that exists in the Bahai Faith.... When real diversity shows itself, it's fanatically attacked, crushed, driven away, or overwhelmingly voted down, relegating it to comparative obscurity.... > > Unity in Diversity: > > The phrase "unity in diversity" is an important one that has > been used much among Baha'is (and even non-Baha'is). Our > commitment to it is only the beginning of making it a reality. > Our individual actions are but another key part of bringing it > about. In our efforts we should, IMHO, turn away from false > divisions and seek to move beyond "false unity." > It is in working together that there is a lot to be done. > Fortunately, much in the Baha'i Writings can serve to facilitate > these efforts. > > DZO Your idealizations about Bahai community life are the usual ones, which are, largely, distortions.... -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Thu May 22 19:34:27 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Thu May 22 13:48:57 1997 Received: (qmail 2193 invoked from network); 21 May 1997 11:21:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.119) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 21 May 1997 11:21:47 -0000 Message-ID: <3382DB14.14F2@hotmail.com> Date: Wed, 21 May 1997 07:23:00 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc,soc.rights.human CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: False divisions, false unity, and building "Unity in Diversity" References: <5lq916$5ki$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <3381825D.21DB@hotmail.com> <5lspkr$mqf@drn.zippo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 6548 The, Tick wrote: > > In article <3381825D.21DB@hotmail.com>, Frederick says... > > > >Donald Zhang Osborn wrote: > >> > >> False Divisions, False Unity, and Building Unity in Diversity > >> > >> On the Usenet recently there has been a bit of bashing of > >> the Baha'i community for certain faults perceived by one or > >> another person, including dismissing its unity as "superficial" > >> and attempting to negatively categorize different types of > >> Baha'is. While no one would claim that the Baha'i community is > >> perfect, I would like to put such notions into a different and > >> hopefully constructive perspective. > >> > >> False Divisions: > >> > >> Differences in opinions, interests, likes & dislikes are > >> part of social reality (however constructed or perceived). Seen > >> as diversity these differences are a source of strength. > >> Diversity in strengths, needs, experience need to be understood > >> and appreciated as part of community growth and development. > > > >The reality in Bahai communities, though, is that such diversity > >is not accepted but suppressed and measured against a narrowly > >defined understanding of what a "true" Bahai should be doing, > >thinking, etc.... > > > > No... this is "Fred's reality". I have a sneaky suspicion that due to the > abrasive manner of Mr. Glaysher's style of communication, he ends up isolating > himself and therefore feeling alone and not part of the crowd. Please spare me your psuedo-psychologizing.... > > >> On the other hand, when differences are used to describe > >> divisions or categories, there is the danger of constructing > >> false divisions: e.g., "this nationality thinks this way (unlike > >> us)"; "most of the community is ignorant (unlike some other > >> group)"; there is "this kind" vs. "that kind" of Baha'i; etc. > > > >The reality is there are fundamental differences between the way > >nationalities think, live, etc.... These aren't "false" divisions, > >these are REAL divisions.... > > > > Actually, I think you are correct on this point. But just because they exist > (the divisions) doesn't mean they need to persist in perpetuity. The notion that they won't perdure is puerile.... > > >> Emphasizing differences, IMHO, only helps if it leads to the > >> larger goals of unity and justice (whose purpose is the > >> appearance of unity). > > > >Unity and justice, in whose opinion? If injustice serves the cause > >of justice is it just? Many Bahais seem to think so, I believe. > > > > I would think many more Baha'is would NOT think this way. Either way, this > viewpoint is a matter of opinion and personal experience; it really has nothing > to do with the topic. How do you know YOUR view of justice and injustice is > the correct one? What you're trying to do is change the subject.... The fact is I've seen Bahais do really contemptible things believing they're "serving" the cause.... The end justifying the means.... > > >And this has to be done with utmost tact > >> and in observance of the high standards of communication set > >> forth in the Writings if it is to have any hope of achieving such > >> a positive end. > >> Portraying perceived differences as more fundamental > >> divisions in the community cannot, IMHO, serve any positive end, > >> especially when it involves characterizing other people. In any > >> event, one risks creating a false division--a construction that > >> does not reflect any significant reality--and something that does > >> not promote unity or justice, but rather confuses and alienates. > > > >Ignoring and distorting the fundamental differences serves no > >purpose except the aggrandizing of control in the hands of those > >who want it.... They never hesitate to characterize other people > >when it serves their purposes.... > > > > This statement is laughable! Fred, you just described yourself. When you call > people "fanatics", "zealots", etc., you are characterizing people to serve > your own purpose. And don't bother re-re-reiterating what you may have been > called by others. Two wrongs making a right is a stupid argument. Tit for tat, as they say.... The differences exist.... Pretending they don't and then calling it "unity" is what's truly laughable and pathetic.... > > [clip] > >> Although "false unity" is not the ideal, and one would not > >> suggest to be satisfied with it, it is important not to minimize > >> the significance of that limited achievement in as remarkably > >> diverse a community as we are. It is a necessary first step, if > >> you will, and seen as such encourages us to take more steps. > > > >False unity, in my experience, is the only "unity" that exists in > >the Bahai Faith.... When real diversity shows itself, it's > >fanatically attacked, crushed, driven away, or overwhelmingly > >voted down, relegating it to comparative obscurity.... > > > > How about a few examples, Fred? And to make this really objective, let's > keep your own personal instances out of it. Just because something happens to > you doesn't make it universal. I've already alluded to the 600+ attack against diverse opinions being expressed on the proposed talk.religion.bahai.... > > >> > >> Unity in Diversity: > >> > >> The phrase "unity in diversity" is an important one that has > >> been used much among Baha'is (and even non-Baha'is). Our > >> commitment to it is only the beginning of making it a reality. > >> Our individual actions are but another key part of bringing it > >> about. In our efforts we should, IMHO, turn away from false > >> divisions and seek to move beyond "false unity." > >> It is in working together that there is a lot to be done. > >> Fortunately, much in the Baha'i Writings can serve to facilitate > >> these efforts. > >> > >> DZO > > > >Your idealizations about Bahai community life are the usual ones, > >which are, largely, distortions.... > > > > And your defamation and misrepresentation about Baha'i community life are your > usual ones, which are, largely, distortions.... with no pertinent data to > back up your empty claims. You want sociological research data? Where would I or they obtain the information? The American Bahai? The Bahai Encyclopedia? Soc.religion.bahai? Oh, yes, misrepresentation and distortions.... > > T -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Thu May 22 19:34:51 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Thu May 22 13:55:53 1997 Received: (qmail 5936 invoked from network); 22 May 1997 11:08:09 -0000 Received: from ts?rh.metronet.lib.mi.us (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.20) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 22 May 1997 11:08:09 -0000 Message-ID: <33842961.20B7@hotmail.com> Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 07:09:21 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc,soc.rights.human CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: False divisions, false unity, and building "Unity in Diversity" References: <5lq916$5ki$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <3381825D.21DB@hotmail.com> <5lspkr$mqf@drn.zippo.com> <3382DB14.14F2@hotmail.com> <5lvamf$jia@drn.zippo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 8784 The, Tick wrote: > > In article <3382DB14.14F2@hotmail.com>, Frederick says... > > > >The, Tick wrote: > >> > >> In article <3381825D.21DB@hotmail.com>, Frederick says... > >> >The reality in Bahai communities, though, is that such diversity > >> >is not accepted but suppressed and measured against a narrowly > >> >defined understanding of what a "true" Bahai should be doing, > >> >thinking, etc.... > >> > > >> > >> No... this is "Fred's reality". I have a sneaky suspicion that due to the > >> abrasive manner of Mr. Glaysher's style of communication, he ends up isolating > >> himself and therefore feeling alone and not part of the crowd. > > > >Please spare me your psuedo-psychologizing.... > > > > Here's a thought: why don't you spare us yours as well. There are COUNTLESS > archives of you dispensing the same garbage on others. I don't see a "Dr." > title hanging on your wall. If there is, I wonder where you bought it. Tsk, tsk, tsk.... You're getting testy.... > > >> >The reality is there are fundamental differences between the way > >> >nationalities think, live, etc.... These aren't "false" divisions, > >> >these are REAL divisions.... > >> > > >> > >> Actually, I think you are correct on this point. But just because they exist > >> (the divisions) doesn't mean they need to persist in perpetuity. > > > >The notion that they won't perdure is puerile.... > > > > (One second while I break out my handy-dandy dictionary...) > > Yeah! Exactly! The argument goes both ways. Even though the problem may > exist for centuries or millenium, I can gauranteee you it won't be the exact > same problem as it always has been. Maybe it'll be better, and maybe it'll be > worse. Hopefully better. I harbor no such hope but rather a very low opinion of human beings.... based on five thousand years of recorded history.... > > >> >> Emphasizing differences, IMHO, only helps if it leads to the > >> >> larger goals of unity and justice (whose purpose is the > >> >> appearance of unity). > >> > > >> >Unity and justice, in whose opinion? If injustice serves the cause > >> >of justice is it just? Many Bahais seem to think so, I believe. > >> > > >> > >> I would think many more Baha'is would NOT think this way. Either way, this > >> viewpoint is a matter of opinion and personal experience; it really has nothing > >> to do with the topic. How do you know YOUR view of justice and injustice is > >> the correct one? > > > >What you're trying to do is change the subject.... The fact is I've seen > >Bahais do really contemptible things believing they're "serving" the > >cause.... > >The end justifying the means.... > > > > Uhhh... no, I'm not trying to do anything of the sort. It may be your > perception, but that doesn't make it reality. > > Yes, I've seen many contemptible things by Baha'is, some of whom I highly > respected and admired. I don't in any way deny that it happens. Egads! A word of truth.... > > As for the ends justifying the means... You obviously feel that your means of > addressing people/topics justifies the end of knocking some sense into people. > Many, many others do not agree with you (as you very well know). Which comes > back again to the question you stated, "Unity and justice, in whose opinion?". > I don't doubt you feel justified. I've no doubt others feel justified in what > they have done/said. Who is right, and who is wrong? We could argue until > the cows come home, but in the end it will only be one opinion against another. The human comedy.... > > The only safeguard there is for this is the Writings. Which we are constantly > exhorted upon to deepen upon and reference. And the things that aren't > absolutely referred to can be taken up at the local, national, or (if need be) > Universal House level. And these institutions, which WE voted upon who would > sit on them, have been given the power to rule on certain things with very > explicit guidelines, and we are responsible for obeying their decisions. Each > of these statements can be backed up by numerous quotes. I'm not providing > them because for some inexplicable reason you often immediately ignore the > argument being made if a quote (from the Writings, for God's sake!) disagrees > with your point. The Devil reads the Writings too! > > Assemblies, etc. have made "wrong" decisions. How true it is.... We are told, for the sake of > unity, to obey these decisions (it does not say we can't try to help enlighten, > etc. in the meantime) until the assembly reverses that decision. During both > periods, when the decision was "wrong", and when the decision was "right", we > must obey the institution. I'm sorry if this is a big, bitter pill in your > throat, but that's the facts! > > >> >Ignoring and distorting the fundamental differences serves no > >> >purpose except the aggrandizing of control in the hands of those > >> >who want it.... They never hesitate to characterize other people > >> >when it serves their purposes.... > >> > > >> > >> This statement is laughable! Fred, you just described yourself. When you call > >> people "fanatics", "zealots", etc., you are characterizing people to serve > >> your own purpose. And don't bother re-re-reiterating what you may have been > >> called by others. Two wrongs making a right is a stupid argument. > > > >Tit for tat, as they say.... > > Ohhhh, THAT justifies it! Yesiree! Well, by all means, keep on labeling > and abusing others. How about moving beyond the Old Testament, Fred? Both "sides" aren't reading the same tome? > > >The differences exist.... Pretending > >they don't and then calling it "unity" is what's truly laughable > >and pathetic.... > > > > (See argument on unity above...) > > >> >Ignoring and distorting the fundamental differences serves no > >> >purpose except the aggrandizing of control in the hands of those > >> >who want it.... They never hesitate to characterize other people > >> >when it serves their purposes.... > >> > > >> > >> How about a few examples, Fred? And to make this really objective, let's > >> keep your own personal instances out of it. Just because something happens to > >> you doesn't make it universal. > > > >I've already alluded to the 600+ attack against diverse opinions > >being expressed on the proposed talk.religion.bahai.... > > > > No good at all. The FACTS, while they show 600+ votes against, do not show > that each and every NO vote was an "attack". You cannot deny that. You know > as well as I that most people did not fully understand the situation nor what > exactly what required of them. An assumption on your part.... The fact is they voted as they did and had months to decide. Many people posted detailed instructions on how to vote and why to soc.religion.bahai and elsewhere.... It's quite false to claim that 691 people didn't know what they were doing.... > > And you've beaten this horse to death. Can't you think of any other > examples besides your own "rage against the machine"? There are many examples. This one is current and witnessed by all right here in front of their own eyes.... That's all.... The evidence exists on www.dejanews.com for anyone who would like to go back and search for talk.religion.bahai on news.groups or in general.... > > >> >Your idealizations about Bahai community life are the usual ones, > >> >which are, largely, distortions.... > >> > > >> > >> And your defamation and misrepresentation about Baha'i community life are your > >> usual ones, which are, largely, distortions.... with no pertinent data to > >> back up your empty claims. > > > >You want sociological research data? Where would I or they obtain the > >information? The American Bahai? The Bahai Encyclopedia? > >Soc.religion.bahai? Oh, yes, misrepresentation and distortions.... > > > > ANYTHING would be a good start! You've repeatedly been asked to provide facts, > and all you do is give your own examples, which are highly debatable in > viewpoint. Isn't there anything else? Does this constitute your sole > argument, what you feel has been done to you? I am, like all men, limited to and by my own experience.... It is all I have and all I am.... "Data" in a Bahai context means very, very little to anyone who understands data there is always given an optimistic spin.... Others would use different words to describe it, I suppose.... > > We patiently await some information of more substance. Obviously, only so you can attack it.... > > T -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Fri May 23 07:48:29 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Fri May 23 04:01:07 1997 Received: (qmail 15759 invoked from network); 23 May 1997 10:59:38 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.122) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 23 May 1997 10:59:38 -0000 Message-ID: <338578E3.3C03@hotmail.com> Date: Fri, 23 May 1997 07:00:51 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,misc.misc CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: False divisions, false unity, and building "Unity in Diversity" References: <5lq916$5ki$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <3381825D.21DB@hotmail.com> <5lspkr$mqf@drn.zippo.com> <3382DB14.14F2@hotmail.com> <5lvamf$jia@drn.zippo.com> <33842961.20B7@hotmail.com> <5m2cif$n0r@drn.zippo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 4447 The, Tick wrote: > > In article <33842961.20B7@hotmail.com>, Frederick says... > > > >The Tick said: > >> No good at all. The FACTS, while they show 600+ votes against, do not show > >> that each and every NO vote was an "attack". You cannot deny that. You know > >> as well as I that most people did not fully understand the situation nor what > >> exactly what required of them. > > > >An assumption on your part.... The fact is they voted as they did and > >had > >months to decide. Many people posted detailed instructions on how to > >vote > >and why to soc.religion.bahai and elsewhere.... It's quite false to > >claim > >that 691 people didn't know what they were doing.... > > > > Wrong. Complete and utterly wrong. Quite a few people that voted NO only got > one or two (obviously biased) pleas about the vote, via e-mail. And that > information was not altogether complete or accurate. You forget, not everyone > reads soc.religion.bahai, as we do. Therefore they did not have months to > decide, nor did they have the same detailed instructions as others did. Detweiler, moderator at soc.religion.bahai, and Christopher Stone, mentor for group-advice at Usenet, both posted detailed guidelines for voting. You and others continue to ignore that in your attempts to justify the fraud.... > > In my community alone, I saw at least 50+ people get these pleas (I was > included on the lists). Since I had taken the time to investigate the > situation and the appropriate policies, I sent out corrections to everyone I > knew had received the previous messages that it was not the full story. I > know these people personally, and I also know that only a couple out of this > entire group use Usenet at all! So, I sent them the text of the vote proposal, > and also quidelines on what constitutes a valid (and moral, net-wise) vote. 50! Now the another piece of the truth comes out.... > > It is not ME that is making an assumption on these facts, then, Fred. It is > YOU. And as long as you persist in this paranoid viewpoint, that everyone is > out to get you, you might as well be pissing in the wind. Very crude expression.... Paranoia is groundless; my concerns are based on 691 NO votes.... > > You're very free to contact all the people who voted no and explain the > situation to them again. That would probably be very effective in getting the > resolution passed the next time. It would at least inform them of the policies. > However, I would recommend that being 'nice' would go a lot further in having > people listen to your arguments. Contact them? How about if you do that in early October as the next vote for talk.religion.bahai approaches? Can I rely on you? > > In the presidential election alone, people have many more months to decide than > this, and they are inundated at all angles with information (yes, and even > misinformation). And do you think every one of the people who vote in the > presidential election has made an "informed" decision? To say yes is > ludicrous. > > > > >> We patiently await some information of more substance. > > > >Obviously, only so you can attack it.... > > Shall I quote you, Fred? "Tit for tat, as they say...." > > You are definitely an enigma to me, Fred. As a Baha'i, I would think that you > at least believe in The Golden Rule, which has been reiterated throughout time. > And I'm sure you're even aware of how much further this is taken in the Baha'i > Faith, as we should prefer our "brother" to ourselves. > > There's really no reason to bring these discussions down to a mud-slinging > match. Everybody gets dirty, and no one ends up looking good in the long run. > > So, I don't know about you, but I'm going to take a shower. > > In any case, I'm not going to argue the point anymore. If you can't see the > facts (and the voting situation is not opinion, it is FACT), then I'm done with > you. It's like talking to a brick wall, and a stubborn one at that. You are > now welcome to paste in your cute witticisms throughout this post, playing > the martyr in a non-issue. I understand your frustrations.... They've been expressed for months by others who believe in the monolithic view of the Bahai Faith and, I suppose, human nature.... > > The Tick has left the building. -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Thu May 29 05:59:03 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Wed May 28 02:53:38 1997 Received: (qmail 20674 invoked from network); 28 May 1997 09:52:16 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.118) by hm2.hotmail.com with SMTP; 28 May 1997 09:52:16 -0000 Message-ID: <338C009B.C66@hotmail.com> Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 05:53:31 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,misc.misc,talk.religion.misc,soc.culture.israel,soc.culture.iranian,soc.rights.huma n,alt.religion CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: False divisions, false unity, and building "Unity in Diversity" References: <5lq916$5ki$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <3381825D.21DB@hotmail.com> <5mfbq6$k2t$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 2473 Donald Zhang Osborn wrote: > > Frederick Glaysher wrote: > >Donald Zhang Osborn wrote: > >> On the other hand, when differences are used to describe > >> divisions or categories, there is the danger of constructing > >> false divisions: e.g., "this nationality thinks this way (unlike > >> us)"; "most of the community is ignorant (unlike some other > >> group)"; there is "this kind" vs. "that kind" of Baha'i; etc. > > > >The reality is there are fundamental differences between the way > >nationalities think, live, etc.... These aren't "false" divisions, > >these are REAL divisions.... > > No, the divisions are not real, Frederick, or more to the point, > they are only as real as we choose to make them. IOW, they are > "socially constructed" through dialogue, action, etc. Excuse me, but I've been wanting to ask you this for a long time. And I don't intend it as an insult. How old are you, Mr. Osborn? > > Differences, on the other hand, are real but complex. Moreover, > we (each of us, all of us) have a choice about how to treat > differences: magnify, generalize, discriminate; or transcend, > seek to understand, learn from. And the choice of each is not > contingent on the choice of another: each of us is responsible > before God for treating others in a loving way no matter how we > perceive their behavior (see for instance Writings of Abdu'l-Baha > on how to treat people "different" from ourselves -- search at: > https://sunsite.unc.edu/Bahai/TrueSeeker/ ). > > I think part of the reason Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha emphasized > the importance of unity is because we have a choice and because > the differences between nationalities, races, etc. are not > "fundamental" (Abdu'l-Baha even said they were not real divisions). > Our choice: the easy one to socially (re)construct or "reinvent" > false divisions that will continue to plague humanity, or the more > challenging one, to work through deeds and words to build unity, > a unity that respects and learns from differences as diversity. > The latter path is harder, and it has never been done before on > a global scale -- so there are false starts, efforts that the > cynical might smirk at, and imperfections that must be resolved, > but it has rewards in the short term and the long run for > individuals and the global society as a whole. > > DZO -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Thu May 29 07:52:33 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Thu May 29 03:43:00 1997 Received: (qmail 20585 invoked from network); 29 May 1997 10:42:58 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.121) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 29 May 1997 10:42:58 -0000 Message-ID: <338D5DFC.427C@hotmail.com> Date: Thu, 29 May 1997 06:44:12 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,misc.misc,talk.religion.misc,alt.religion,soc.culture.israel,soc.culture.iranian CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: False divisions, false unity, and building "Unity in Diversity" References: <5lq916$5ki$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <3381825D.21DB@hotmail.com> <5mfbq6$k2t$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <338C009B.C66@hotmail.com> <5mi8jj$892$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 5549 Donald Zhang Osborn wrote: > > Frederick Glaysher wrote: > >Donald Zhang Osborn wrote: > >> No, the divisions are not real, Frederick, or more to the point, > >> they are only as real as we choose to make them. IOW, they are > >> "socially constructed" through dialogue, action, etc. > > > >Excuse me, but I've been wanting to ask you this for a long time. > >And I don't intend it as an insult. How old are you, Mr. Osborn? > > Old enough to recognize an irrelevant diversion and young at heart > enough to have hope and idealism. I'll accept you don't mean the > question as an insult, but can you honestly tell me that it's not > another attempt to minimize a point of view that doesn't coincide > with your own? Not trying to minimize it. I taught rhetoric to eighteen-year-olds for more than a decade.... I know their simple, idealistic prose.... Twenty-two? There are those, in history, who have done well by exploiting the idealism of the young.... I honor it, respect it, relish it, know all cultures require it in order to renew themselves in this horribly appalling world of misery and woe.... The wise have always thought, though, that it also must be kindly protected from itself.... > > My point still stands. Let's approach it from a different angle. > It is important to understand differences among peoples and cultures > for what they are and for what they are not. I suggest they are > complex, in that there are differences within cultures and > similarities across cultures that make drawing simple lines between > peoples and cultures of limited validity, and calling them "real > divisions" untenable. I'm not so concerned about differences between cultures. They're not going away into a worthless, maudlin mush.... I'm interested in the influence of the Iranian culture on Iranian Bahais and then their influence on the interpretation of the Bahai Revelation.... which in my opinion is ruining it.... > > My point of view is based on several years of living and working in > West Africa (villages & a town) in which I was able to gain enough > proficiency in two dialects of Fulfulde to compile and publish lexicon > for one of those dialects, and several years ongoing in a cross cultural > marriage. Although my major interest is natural resource management and > development, I am quite familiar with the currents of thought in African > studies about the construction of "ethnicity" in Africa (which is even > more complex and fluid than in most other parts of the world). > > I honestly think that there is lot to learn from "other ways of knowing" > of the many cultures of the world, and that much in the Baha'i Writings > can help the world in this process (which is much more enriching than the > spread of Western commercialism (which I think is as detrimental to > Western cultures as it is to non-Western ones). But I digress. Oh the evil Western world.... I'm so weary of canned thinking.... > > I confess having a hard time understanding why you would want to stress > "real divisions" between peoples when the project of the new > century/millenium (especially from a Baha'i point of view) is how to > find/build/develop common ground and understanding, i.e. to achieve > the unity (but not uniformity) of humankind) so the human race can > survive. Of course differences are there -- they're as plain as day. > But we have a choice about how to treat them, and how we treat them > eventually becomes its own reality. The Reality of Evil is its difference from good.... "Oh Iago, oh inhuman dog...." > > Permit me to close this with a sincere question: what do you think > Abdu'l-Baha meant when he said that differences between nations and > races were "not real divisions"? I'm honestly curious (the young at > heart, you know). DZO > > >> Differences, on the other hand, are real but complex. Moreover, > >> we (each of us, all of us) have a choice about how to treat > >> differences: magnify, generalize, discriminate; or transcend, > >> seek to understand, learn from. And the choice of each is not > >> contingent on the choice of another: each of us is responsible > >> before God for treating others in a loving way no matter how we > >> perceive their behavior (see for instance Writings of Abdu'l-Baha > >> on how to treat people "different" from ourselves -- search at: > >> https://sunsite.unc.edu/Bahai/TrueSeeker/ ). > >> > >> I think part of the reason Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha emphasized > >> the importance of unity is because we have a choice and because > >> the differences between nationalities, races, etc. are not > >> "fundamental" (Abdu'l-Baha even said they were not real divisions). > >> Our choice: the easy one to socially (re)construct or "reinvent" > >> false divisions that will continue to plague humanity, or the more > >> challenging one, to work through deeds and words to build unity, > >> a unity that respects and learns from differences as diversity. > >> The latter path is harder, and it has never been done before on > >> a global scale -- so there are false starts, efforts that the > >> cynical might smirk at, and imperfections that must be resolved, > >> but it has rewards in the short term and the long run for > >> individuals and the global society as a whole. > >> > >> DZO > > > >-- > >Frederick Glaysher > >UseNet: alt.religion.bahai -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Tue Jun 10 07:59:28 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Tue Jun 10 03:37:23 1997 Received: (qmail 25208 invoked from network); 10 Jun 1997 10:35:42 -0000 Received: from ts?rh.metronet.lib.mi.us (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.20) by hm3.hotmail.com with SMTP; 10 Jun 1997 10:35:42 -0000 Message-ID: <339D2E50.25C7@hotmail.com> Date: Tue, 10 Jun 1997 06:37:04 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc,soc.rights.human,soc.culture.israel,soc.culture.iranian CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: False divisions, false unity, and building "Unity in Diversity" References: <5lq916$5ki$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <3381825D.21DB@hotmail.com> <5mfbq6$k2t$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <338C009B.C66@hotmail.com> <5mi8jj$892$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <338D5DFC.427C@hotmail.com> <01bc7569$fc5b77c0$29282299@ELN/yahxanan> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 756 Mark van Brenk wrote: > > Allah-u-abha! > [clip] > Also, the Iranian, or more correctly Persian, Baha'i are not having an > influence on the interpretation of the Revelation of Baha'u'llah. The > Universal House of Justice consists of a variety of nationalities. That is > the central body of the Baha'i Faith, and is diverse. Where's Persia? Can't find it on a map.... It's ludicrous to say Iranian Bahais are not influencing the interpretation of the Bahai Faith.... They ARE the Bahai Faith.... It's not necessarily pertinent that other nationalities are on the UHJ. For instance, and the parallel isn't exact, there have been many puppet regimes known throughout history.... -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Tue Jun 17 08:20:55 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Tue Jun 17 05:10:01 1997 Received: (qmail 2966 invoked from network); 17 Jun 1997 12:09:59 -0000 Received: from ts?rh.metronet.lib.mi.us (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.20) by hm2.hotmail.com with SMTP; 17 Jun 1997 12:09:59 -0000 Message-ID: <33A67EE3.A92@hotmail.com> Date: Tue, 17 Jun 1997 08:11:15 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,misc.misc,talk.religion.misc,alt.religion,soc.culture.iranian,soc.culture.israel CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Iranian "culture" (was Re: False divisions, false unity, and building "Unity in Diversity") References: <5lq916$5ki$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <3381825D.21DB@hotmail.com> <5mfbq6$k2t$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <338C009B.C66@hotmail.com> <5mi8jj$892$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <338D5DFC.427C@hotmail.com> <5o43vr$79i$2@msunews.cl.msu.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 1988 Donald Zhang Osborn wrote: [clip] > The remarks you have posted have reified a category of "Iranian culture," > assigned to it certain broad characteristics, and then blamed it for > (it seems) any shortcoming in the Baha'i community. Iranian society and > culture are in fact diverse, as are the Baha'is of Iranian origin, so > it makes no sense to talk about "Iranian culture" in such broad and sweeping > ways -- let alone to express negative ideas about an entire people. Actually, the tenor of Iranian "culture," Bahai and non-Bahai, has been represented quite well recently here on alt.religion.bahai by the Webmaster of Iranvision.com.... No reification involved.... > [clip] > >> I honestly think that there is lot to learn from "other ways of knowing" > >> of the many cultures of the world, and that much in the Baha'i Writings > >> can help the world in this process (which is much more enriching than the > >> spread of Western commercialism (which I think is as detrimental to > >> Western cultures as it is to non-Western ones). But I digress. > > > >Oh the evil Western world.... I'm so weary of canned thinking.... > > If you look carefully you will notice I did not write anything about "evil > Western world," so I don't know what you mean by "canned thinking." I did > make a perhaps indefensible remark about "Western commercialism" (too > amorphous a category). I do think some trends in the global socio-economy > (dominated still by Western interests) do not favor true development in > either the West or other parts of the world, but I don't have time to go > into that now. And what I wrote about the co-enrichment of cultures obviously > does not imply the greater or lesser value of any culture (quite the contrary). "Western interests"? Yawn.... A liberal cliche.... I think of those evil Western economies, Taiwan, Hong Kong, Japan, etc.... > > DZO -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Tue Jun 24 07:51:19 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Tue Jun 24 04:26:02 1997 Received: (qmail 2818 invoked from network); 24 Jun 1997 11:26:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.117) by hm3.hotmail.com with SMTP; 24 Jun 1997 11:26:00 -0000 Message-ID: <33AFAF13.7B62@hotmail.com> Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 07:27:15 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,misc.misc,talk.religion.misc,alt.religion,soc.culture.iranian,soc.culture.israel,alt.r eligion.islam CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Iranian "culture" (was Re: False divisions, false unity, and building "Unity in Diversity") References: <5lq916$5ki$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <3381825D.21DB@hotmail.com> <5mfbq6$k2t$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <338C009B.C66@hotmail.com> <5mi8jj$892$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <338D5DFC.427C@hotmail.com> <5o43vr$79i$2@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <33A67EE3.A92@hotmail.com> <866670396.32401@dejanews.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 5583 webmaster@iranvision.com wrote: > > In article <33A67EE3.A92@hotmail.com>, > FG@hotmail.com wrote: > > > Actually, the tenor of Iranian "culture," Bahai and non-Bahai, has > > been represented quite well recently here on alt.religion.bahai by > > the Webmaster of Iranvision.com.... No reification involved.... > > > > -- > > Frederick Glaysher > > UseNet: alt.religion.bahai > > Well Iranian culture is what makes Iranians. Initially I was impressed > with your opposition to the Bahai extremism and censorship. But now I > realize that although you used my experiences with the Bahai censorship > and racism in alt.religion.bahai and regarding soc.religion.bahai, your > motives were of a different nature. You are not really a fighter for > freedom, but are attempting to spread your version of Bahaism based on > your hatred of Iranian culture and society. "Hatred" is not a word I would choose.... Nor would I characterize myself as attempting to "spread" a "version" of "Bahaism." > > What makes Bahaism defective as a "religion" is not the influence of the > Iranian culture, but its own writings and claims which are full of > contradictions and visions of totalitarianism. I think you are right that the Writings are full of contradictions.... At times, I would call them paradoxes.... It may be true that there are visions of totalitarianism too.... Now you can go on and > blame this on other cultures pointing the finger at "Iranian culture". > Your statement is illogical, in a sense that Bahaullah himself was > Iranian, and therefore the issue of Iranian and Bahaism are inseparable. In a sense, yes.... Jesus did not, however, attempt to make all people into Jews.... Paul, among others, helped to cut that cord.... I'm not sure there's ever been an analogous right of passage in the Bahai Faith. It seems still very much an Iranian religion, i.e., one still influenced excessively by the culture and land of its birth.... That's all I'm really saying. I neither "hate" individual Iranian Bahais or the culture as a whole. In fact, I've always especially admired Attar and Rumi, though Rumi failed to achieve what the Irish poet Yeats would have called a Vision of Evil.... > It is analogous to Jesus and the Jews. You cannot say christianity should > not be influenced by Judism and blame the short comings of christianity > on Judism. Although Bahais, as a cult, are well organized, they lack the > essence of logic in their arguements, which in the 20th century makes > them unacceptable as a religion and more acceptable as a cult. I've known highly illogical Bahais.... and all other people for that matter.... A definition of humanity, really.... > > What I represented on the postings relating to Bahaism were in defense of > freedom of speech. I am a supporter of freedom of speech and against > censorship by accetpted religions like Islam, Judaism, and Christianity > or widespread cults such as Davidians or Bahais. Do you support the fatwa against Salman Rushdie? Iranian culture, its basic tenor, as we can talk about the tenor of Chinese, Spanish, or any other culture, does not play a role in that fanatical injustice? Incidentally, to my mind, Rushdie's work contains many brilliant insights into the nature of modern Islam and Iranian "culture." > > In my postings absolutely no issues were discussed regarding Iran as a > society and my postings were aimed at Bahais and none Bahais of all > origins. However, your prejudice of Iranian society makes you conceive > the issues presented by me as an example of Iranian influence in Bahaism > (why I don't know!) and not as a person in defense of freedom of speech. Again, tell me where you stand on Rushdie, and I'll tell you if you're an Iranian I could ever even have the slightest respect for.... And what of the suppression and murder of Bahais in Iran.... Are they allowed freedom of speech? > > Had I been censored from soc.culture.iranian, I still would have written > the same article regarding the such would be moderator. My origin, > religion, or political beliefs are irrelevant in this issue and the > articles I posted regarding Bahaism were not influenced by such. > > Please do not use my articles as evidence supporting your cause, my sole > purpose is defense of Freedom of Speech and not defense of Bahai > ideology. Are you a "secular" Iranian? There have been, in this century, so many secular causes and programs in Iran, all of which have been, well, you describe their results.... I believe the only hope for Iran is for it to convert en masse to the Bahai Faith, embrace the destiny God has given it.... > > webmaster@iranvision.com > and proud to be Iranian with Iranian Culture! > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > Iran Culture and Information Center > https://www.IranVision.com > Established January 1997 > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > News - Chat - Weather - Art - Pictures - Poetry - Music - Forum - Games > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > IRAN: (old: Persia) n: Land of Aryans (nobles, pure

) > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > > -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- > https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Tue Jun 24 07:51:19 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Tue Jun 24 04:26:02 1997 Received: (qmail 2818 invoked from network); 24 Jun 1997 11:26:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.117) by hm3.hotmail.com with SMTP; 24 Jun 1997 11:26:00 -0000 Message-ID: <33AFAF13.7B62@hotmail.com> Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 07:27:15 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,misc.misc,talk.religion.misc,alt.religion,soc.culture.iranian,soc.culture.israel,alt.r eligion.islam CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Iranian "culture" (was Re: False divisions, false unity, and building "Unity in Diversity") References: <5lq916$5ki$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <3381825D.21DB@hotmail.com> <5mfbq6$k2t$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <338C009B.C66@hotmail.com> <5mi8jj$892$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <338D5DFC.427C@hotmail.com> <5o43vr$79i$2@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <33A67EE3.A92@hotmail.com> <866670396.32401@dejanews.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 5583 webmaster@iranvision.com wrote: > > In article <33A67EE3.A92@hotmail.com>, > FG@hotmail.com wrote: > > > Actually, the tenor of Iranian "culture," Bahai and non-Bahai, has > > been represented quite well recently here on alt.religion.bahai by > > the Webmaster of Iranvision.com.... No reification involved.... > > > > -- > > Frederick Glaysher > > UseNet: alt.religion.bahai > > Well Iranian culture is what makes Iranians. Initially I was impressed > with your opposition to the Bahai extremism and censorship. But now I > realize that although you used my experiences with the Bahai censorship > and racism in alt.religion.bahai and regarding soc.religion.bahai, your > motives were of a different nature. You are not really a fighter for > freedom, but are attempting to spread your version of Bahaism based on > your hatred of Iranian culture and society. "Hatred" is not a word I would choose.... Nor would I characterize myself as attempting to "spread" a "version" of "Bahaism." > > What makes Bahaism defective as a "religion" is not the influence of the > Iranian culture, but its own writings and claims which are full of > contradictions and visions of totalitarianism. I think you are right that the Writings are full of contradictions.... At times, I would call them paradoxes.... It may be true that there are visions of totalitarianism too.... Now you can go on and > blame this on other cultures pointing the finger at "Iranian culture". > Your statement is illogical, in a sense that Bahaullah himself was > Iranian, and therefore the issue of Iranian and Bahaism are inseparable. In a sense, yes.... Jesus did not, however, attempt to make all people into Jews.... Paul, among others, helped to cut that cord.... I'm not sure there's ever been an analogous right of passage in the Bahai Faith. It seems still very much an Iranian religion, i.e., one still influenced excessively by the culture and land of its birth.... That's all I'm really saying. I neither "hate" individual Iranian Bahais or the culture as a whole. In fact, I've always especially admired Attar and Rumi, though Rumi failed to achieve what the Irish poet Yeats would have called a Vision of Evil.... > It is analogous to Jesus and the Jews. You cannot say christianity should > not be influenced by Judism and blame the short comings of christianity > on Judism. Although Bahais, as a cult, are well organized, they lack the > essence of logic in their arguements, which in the 20th century makes > them unacceptable as a religion and more acceptable as a cult. I've known highly illogical Bahais.... and all other people for that matter.... A definition of humanity, really.... > > What I represented on the postings relating to Bahaism were in defense of > freedom of speech. I am a supporter of freedom of speech and against > censorship by accetpted religions like Islam, Judaism, and Christianity > or widespread cults such as Davidians or Bahais. Do you support the fatwa against Salman Rushdie? Iranian culture, its basic tenor, as we can talk about the tenor of Chinese, Spanish, or any other culture, does not play a role in that fanatical injustice? Incidentally, to my mind, Rushdie's work contains many brilliant insights into the nature of modern Islam and Iranian "culture." > > In my postings absolutely no issues were discussed regarding Iran as a > society and my postings were aimed at Bahais and none Bahais of all > origins. However, your prejudice of Iranian society makes you conceive > the issues presented by me as an example of Iranian influence in Bahaism > (why I don't know!) and not as a person in defense of freedom of speech. Again, tell me where you stand on Rushdie, and I'll tell you if you're an Iranian I could ever even have the slightest respect for.... And what of the suppression and murder of Bahais in Iran.... Are they allowed freedom of speech? > > Had I been censored from soc.culture.iranian, I still would have written > the same article regarding the such would be moderator. My origin, > religion, or political beliefs are irrelevant in this issue and the > articles I posted regarding Bahaism were not influenced by such. > > Please do not use my articles as evidence supporting your cause, my sole > purpose is defense of Freedom of Speech and not defense of Bahai > ideology. Are you a "secular" Iranian? There have been, in this century, so many secular causes and programs in Iran, all of which have been, well, you describe their results.... I believe the only hope for Iran is for it to convert en masse to the Bahai Faith, embrace the destiny God has given it.... > > webmaster@iranvision.com > and proud to be Iranian with Iranian Culture! > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > Iran Culture and Information Center > https://www.IranVision.com > Established January 1997 > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > News - Chat - Weather - Art - Pictures - Poetry - Music - Forum - Games > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > IRAN: (old: Persia) n: Land of Aryans (nobles, pure

) > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > > -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- > https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Tue Jun 24 07:51:19 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Tue Jun 24 04:26:02 1997 Received: (qmail 2818 invoked from network); 24 Jun 1997 11:26:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.117) by hm3.hotmail.com with SMTP; 24 Jun 1997 11:26:00 -0000 Message-ID: <33AFAF13.7B62@hotmail.com> Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 07:27:15 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,misc.misc,talk.religion.misc,alt.religion,soc.culture.iranian,soc.culture.israel,alt.r eligion.islam CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Iranian "culture" (was Re: False divisions, false unity, and building "Unity in Diversity") References: <5lq916$5ki$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <3381825D.21DB@hotmail.com> <5mfbq6$k2t$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <338C009B.C66@hotmail.com> <5mi8jj$892$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <338D5DFC.427C@hotmail.com> <5o43vr$79i$2@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <33A67EE3.A92@hotmail.com> <866670396.32401@dejanews.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 5583 webmaster@iranvision.com wrote: > > In article <33A67EE3.A92@hotmail.com>, > FG@hotmail.com wrote: > > > Actually, the tenor of Iranian "culture," Bahai and non-Bahai, has > > been represented quite well recently here on alt.religion.bahai by > > the Webmaster of Iranvision.com.... No reification involved.... > > > > -- > > Frederick Glaysher > > UseNet: alt.religion.bahai > > Well Iranian culture is what makes Iranians. Initially I was impressed > with your opposition to the Bahai extremism and censorship. But now I > realize that although you used my experiences with the Bahai censorship > and racism in alt.religion.bahai and regarding soc.religion.bahai, your > motives were of a different nature. You are not really a fighter for > freedom, but are attempting to spread your version of Bahaism based on > your hatred of Iranian culture and society. "Hatred" is not a word I would choose.... Nor would I characterize myself as attempting to "spread" a "version" of "Bahaism." > > What makes Bahaism defective as a "religion" is not the influence of the > Iranian culture, but its own writings and claims which are full of > contradictions and visions of totalitarianism. I think you are right that the Writings are full of contradictions.... At times, I would call them paradoxes.... It may be true that there are visions of totalitarianism too.... Now you can go on and > blame this on other cultures pointing the finger at "Iranian culture". > Your statement is illogical, in a sense that Bahaullah himself was > Iranian, and therefore the issue of Iranian and Bahaism are inseparable. In a sense, yes.... Jesus did not, however, attempt to make all people into Jews.... Paul, among others, helped to cut that cord.... I'm not sure there's ever been an analogous right of passage in the Bahai Faith. It seems still very much an Iranian religion, i.e., one still influenced excessively by the culture and land of its birth.... That's all I'm really saying. I neither "hate" individual Iranian Bahais or the culture as a whole. In fact, I've always especially admired Attar and Rumi, though Rumi failed to achieve what the Irish poet Yeats would have called a Vision of Evil.... > It is analogous to Jesus and the Jews. You cannot say christianity should > not be influenced by Judism and blame the short comings of christianity > on Judism. Although Bahais, as a cult, are well organized, they lack the > essence of logic in their arguements, which in the 20th century makes > them unacceptable as a religion and more acceptable as a cult. I've known highly illogical Bahais.... and all other people for that matter.... A definition of humanity, really.... > > What I represented on the postings relating to Bahaism were in defense of > freedom of speech. I am a supporter of freedom of speech and against > censorship by accetpted religions like Islam, Judaism, and Christianity > or widespread cults such as Davidians or Bahais. Do you support the fatwa against Salman Rushdie? Iranian culture, its basic tenor, as we can talk about the tenor of Chinese, Spanish, or any other culture, does not play a role in that fanatical injustice? Incidentally, to my mind, Rushdie's work contains many brilliant insights into the nature of modern Islam and Iranian "culture." > > In my postings absolutely no issues were discussed regarding Iran as a > society and my postings were aimed at Bahais and none Bahais of all > origins. However, your prejudice of Iranian society makes you conceive > the issues presented by me as an example of Iranian influence in Bahaism > (why I don't know!) and not as a person in defense of freedom of speech. Again, tell me where you stand on Rushdie, and I'll tell you if you're an Iranian I could ever even have the slightest respect for.... And what of the suppression and murder of Bahais in Iran.... Are they allowed freedom of speech? > > Had I been censored from soc.culture.iranian, I still would have written > the same article regarding the such would be moderator. My origin, > religion, or political beliefs are irrelevant in this issue and the > articles I posted regarding Bahaism were not influenced by such. > > Please do not use my articles as evidence supporting your cause, my sole > purpose is defense of Freedom of Speech and not defense of Bahai > ideology. Are you a "secular" Iranian? There have been, in this century, so many secular causes and programs in Iran, all of which have been, well, you describe their results.... I believe the only hope for Iran is for it to convert en masse to the Bahai Faith, embrace the destiny God has given it.... > > webmaster@iranvision.com > and proud to be Iranian with Iranian Culture! > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > Iran Culture and Information Center > https://www.IranVision.com > Established January 1997 > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > News - Chat - Weather - Art - Pictures - Poetry - Music - Forum - Games > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > IRAN: (old: Persia) n: Land of Aryans (nobles, pure

) > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > > -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- > https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Wed Jun 25 06:46:10 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Wed Jun 25 03:22:31 1997 Received: (qmail 5393 invoked from network); 25 Jun 1997 10:22:29 -0000 Received: from ts?rh.metronet.lib.mi.us (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.20) by hm2.hotmail.com with SMTP; 25 Jun 1997 10:22:29 -0000 Message-ID: <33B0F1B7.242E@hotmail.com> Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 06:23:51 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,soc.culture.iranian,talk.religion.misc,alt.religion.islam,soc.rights.human,soc.cultu re.israel CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Iranian "culture" (was Re: False divisions, false unity, and building "Unity in Diversity") References: <5lq916$5ki$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <3381825D.21DB@hotmail.com> <5mfbq6$k2t$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <338C009B.C66@hotmail.com> <5mi8jj$892$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <338D5DFC.427C@hotmail.com> <5o43vr$79i$2@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <33A67EE3.A92@hotmail.com> <866670396.32401@dejanews.com> <33AFAF13.7B62@hotmail.com> <867192866.17148@dejanews.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 5659 webmaster@iranvision.com wrote: > > In article <33AFAF13.7B62@hotmail.com>, > FG@hotmail.com wrote: > > > > > Do you support the fatwa against Salman Rushdie? Iranian culture, its > > basic tenor, as we can talk about the tenor of Chinese, Spanish, or > > any other culture, does not play a role in that fanatical injustice? > > > > Incidentally, to my mind, Rushdie's work contains many brilliant > > insights into the nature of modern Islam and Iranian "culture." > > > > > Are you a "secular" Iranian? There have been, in this century, so > > many secular causes and programs in Iran, all of which have been, > > well, you describe their results.... > > > > I believe the only hope for Iran is for it to convert en masse > > to the Bahai Faith, embrace the destiny God has given it.... > > > -- > > Frederick Glaysher > > UseNet: alt.religion.bahai > > Rushdie's issue is a politico-religious matter. There were many points > involved in the matter when the decree was announced. I feel Rushdie's > issue is irrelevant of this thread. I feel it's highly relevant because it highlights the fanaticism of Iranian culture, perhaps broadly the fanaticism of Islam, as does the stabbing of Naguib Mahfouz, the Nobel laureate, in Egypt a few years ago.... This basic "tenor" of fanaticism, I maintain, seems to be at the root of the thinking of many Iranian Bahais.... Not at all an irrelevant observation in this context, especially after 691 Bahai fanatics suppressed the formation of a free and open newsgroup a few months ago, talk.religion.bahai.... If there is a series of postings > regarding Rushdie I may or may not choose to participate in them. Those > who wish to follow the decree, in their views, are carrying out their > religious order. In my opinion no human being has the right to take away > the life of another human being, even in the cases of extreme evil acts > such as mass murder (yes... not even Hitler should get the chair). I respect your right to your opinion though I do not share it.... > > In certain countries, including United States, freedom of speech has only > artificial tone to it. Anyone who publishes pro-communist articles/books > in United States, will surely go in the C.I.A blacklist. 20 or 30 years > earlier they would have been put to jail or prosecuted as spies. 50 years > ago Japanese Americans were put in camps for simply being Japanese and > thus a national risk, even those who were in the states for 3 > generations. Pardon me, but this is the usual liberal tripe about the evil USA.... Marxist books in the USA are everywhere today.... And I am one who lived for two full years on the Colorado River Indian Tribes Reservation in Arizona, exactly on the site of a former internment camp.... Yawn.... > > So as you see the laws of each nation are relative, designed to serve the > interests of the particular government. I'm not an anarchist.... so.... As you recall, even United > Nations declared Zionism as being a racist movemnet 40 years ago; > however, today they lifted that definition, making zionism a justifiable > movement and a "good" word! Logic dictates that what is immoral and wrong > will always be wrong, be it in 1950s or 1990s, but that is not what life > plays. Definitions change to suite nations and the powerful. In some > cases these include those holding the gun to your head, or at times those > holding your job hostage. Noone said life is fair, and if you read > between my lines you should get your answer regarding Rushdie. Too obscure for me to agonize over.... Of course, Rushdie's basically leftist, as in Satanic Verses, a paean to that ridiculously bankrupt system.... > > Regarding your second question: yes.. I do consider myself a "secular" > individual, but at the same time dislike putting labels on myself or > others. Well, I don't blame you and sorry for sticking one on you too.... What a world we're forced to inhabit.... > > On the last issue you raised: No.. Bahaism is not the answer to any > problem in Iran. In the contrary it causes more problems than there is. > Any mass conversion to a religion/faith/cult is idiotic at best, and only > shows ignorance and loss of individuality in a society. Maybe 2000 years > ago, an entire nation would convert to a religion because its King would > embrace that religion, but not in 20th century. I respect your opinion. I hold out hope for the 21st century.... > > Your last sub-issue: had this been the destiny of Iran.. then why bother > go through the game of life?:) Your destiny is what you make of it and it > is not pre-written or pre-ordered. Yes, I understand and share that point of view too.... And yet there's a mystery to human life.... > > webmaster@iranvision.com > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > Iran Culture and Information Center > https://www.IranVision.com > Established January 1997 > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > News - Chat - Weather - Art - Pictures - Poetry - Music - Forum - Games > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > IRAN: (old: Persia) n: Land of Aryans (nobles, pure

) > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > > -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- > https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet Best wishes, -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Wed Jun 25 06:46:10 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Wed Jun 25 03:22:31 1997 Received: (qmail 5393 invoked from network); 25 Jun 1997 10:22:29 -0000 Received: from ts?rh.metronet.lib.mi.us (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.20) by hm2.hotmail.com with SMTP; 25 Jun 1997 10:22:29 -0000 Message-ID: <33B0F1B7.242E@hotmail.com> Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 06:23:51 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,soc.culture.iranian,talk.religion.misc,alt.religion.islam,soc.rights.human,soc.cultu re.israel CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Iranian "culture" (was Re: False divisions, false unity, and building "Unity in Diversity") References: <5lq916$5ki$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <3381825D.21DB@hotmail.com> <5mfbq6$k2t$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <338C009B.C66@hotmail.com> <5mi8jj$892$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <338D5DFC.427C@hotmail.com> <5o43vr$79i$2@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <33A67EE3.A92@hotmail.com> <866670396.32401@dejanews.com> <33AFAF13.7B62@hotmail.com> <867192866.17148@dejanews.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 5659 webmaster@iranvision.com wrote: > > In article <33AFAF13.7B62@hotmail.com>, > FG@hotmail.com wrote: > > > > > Do you support the fatwa against Salman Rushdie? Iranian culture, its > > basic tenor, as we can talk about the tenor of Chinese, Spanish, or > > any other culture, does not play a role in that fanatical injustice? > > > > Incidentally, to my mind, Rushdie's work contains many brilliant > > insights into the nature of modern Islam and Iranian "culture." > > > > > Are you a "secular" Iranian? There have been, in this century, so > > many secular causes and programs in Iran, all of which have been, > > well, you describe their results.... > > > > I believe the only hope for Iran is for it to convert en masse > > to the Bahai Faith, embrace the destiny God has given it.... > > > -- > > Frederick Glaysher > > UseNet: alt.religion.bahai > > Rushdie's issue is a politico-religious matter. There were many points > involved in the matter when the decree was announced. I feel Rushdie's > issue is irrelevant of this thread. I feel it's highly relevant because it highlights the fanaticism of Iranian culture, perhaps broadly the fanaticism of Islam, as does the stabbing of Naguib Mahfouz, the Nobel laureate, in Egypt a few years ago.... This basic "tenor" of fanaticism, I maintain, seems to be at the root of the thinking of many Iranian Bahais.... Not at all an irrelevant observation in this context, especially after 691 Bahai fanatics suppressed the formation of a free and open newsgroup a few months ago, talk.religion.bahai.... If there is a series of postings > regarding Rushdie I may or may not choose to participate in them. Those > who wish to follow the decree, in their views, are carrying out their > religious order. In my opinion no human being has the right to take away > the life of another human being, even in the cases of extreme evil acts > such as mass murder (yes... not even Hitler should get the chair). I respect your right to your opinion though I do not share it.... > > In certain countries, including United States, freedom of speech has only > artificial tone to it. Anyone who publishes pro-communist articles/books > in United States, will surely go in the C.I.A blacklist. 20 or 30 years > earlier they would have been put to jail or prosecuted as spies. 50 years > ago Japanese Americans were put in camps for simply being Japanese and > thus a national risk, even those who were in the states for 3 > generations. Pardon me, but this is the usual liberal tripe about the evil USA.... Marxist books in the USA are everywhere today.... And I am one who lived for two full years on the Colorado River Indian Tribes Reservation in Arizona, exactly on the site of a former internment camp.... Yawn.... > > So as you see the laws of each nation are relative, designed to serve the > interests of the particular government. I'm not an anarchist.... so.... As you recall, even United > Nations declared Zionism as being a racist movemnet 40 years ago; > however, today they lifted that definition, making zionism a justifiable > movement and a "good" word! Logic dictates that what is immoral and wrong > will always be wrong, be it in 1950s or 1990s, but that is not what life > plays. Definitions change to suite nations and the powerful. In some > cases these include those holding the gun to your head, or at times those > holding your job hostage. Noone said life is fair, and if you read > between my lines you should get your answer regarding Rushdie. Too obscure for me to agonize over.... Of course, Rushdie's basically leftist, as in Satanic Verses, a paean to that ridiculously bankrupt system.... > > Regarding your second question: yes.. I do consider myself a "secular" > individual, but at the same time dislike putting labels on myself or > others. Well, I don't blame you and sorry for sticking one on you too.... What a world we're forced to inhabit.... > > On the last issue you raised: No.. Bahaism is not the answer to any > problem in Iran. In the contrary it causes more problems than there is. > Any mass conversion to a religion/faith/cult is idiotic at best, and only > shows ignorance and loss of individuality in a society. Maybe 2000 years > ago, an entire nation would convert to a religion because its King would > embrace that religion, but not in 20th century. I respect your opinion. I hold out hope for the 21st century.... > > Your last sub-issue: had this been the destiny of Iran.. then why bother > go through the game of life?:) Your destiny is what you make of it and it > is not pre-written or pre-ordered. Yes, I understand and share that point of view too.... And yet there's a mystery to human life.... > > webmaster@iranvision.com > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > Iran Culture and Information Center > https://www.IranVision.com > Established January 1997 > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > News - Chat - Weather - Art - Pictures - Poetry - Music - Forum - Games > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > IRAN: (old: Persia) n: Land of Aryans (nobles, pure

) > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > > -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- > https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet Best wishes, -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Wed Jun 25 06:46:10 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Wed Jun 25 03:22:31 1997 Received: (qmail 5393 invoked from network); 25 Jun 1997 10:22:29 -0000 Received: from ts?rh.metronet.lib.mi.us (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.20) by hm2.hotmail.com with SMTP; 25 Jun 1997 10:22:29 -0000 Message-ID: <33B0F1B7.242E@hotmail.com> Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 06:23:51 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,soc.culture.iranian,talk.religion.misc,alt.religion.islam,soc.rights.human,soc.cultu re.israel CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Iranian "culture" (was Re: False divisions, false unity, and building "Unity in Diversity") References: <5lq916$5ki$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <3381825D.21DB@hotmail.com> <5mfbq6$k2t$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <338C009B.C66@hotmail.com> <5mi8jj$892$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <338D5DFC.427C@hotmail.com> <5o43vr$79i$2@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <33A67EE3.A92@hotmail.com> <866670396.32401@dejanews.com> <33AFAF13.7B62@hotmail.com> <867192866.17148@dejanews.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 5659 webmaster@iranvision.com wrote: > > In article <33AFAF13.7B62@hotmail.com>, > FG@hotmail.com wrote: > > > > > Do you support the fatwa against Salman Rushdie? Iranian culture, its > > basic tenor, as we can talk about the tenor of Chinese, Spanish, or > > any other culture, does not play a role in that fanatical injustice? > > > > Incidentally, to my mind, Rushdie's work contains many brilliant > > insights into the nature of modern Islam and Iranian "culture." > > > > > Are you a "secular" Iranian? There have been, in this century, so > > many secular causes and programs in Iran, all of which have been, > > well, you describe their results.... > > > > I believe the only hope for Iran is for it to convert en masse > > to the Bahai Faith, embrace the destiny God has given it.... > > > -- > > Frederick Glaysher > > UseNet: alt.religion.bahai > > Rushdie's issue is a politico-religious matter. There were many points > involved in the matter when the decree was announced. I feel Rushdie's > issue is irrelevant of this thread. I feel it's highly relevant because it highlights the fanaticism of Iranian culture, perhaps broadly the fanaticism of Islam, as does the stabbing of Naguib Mahfouz, the Nobel laureate, in Egypt a few years ago.... This basic "tenor" of fanaticism, I maintain, seems to be at the root of the thinking of many Iranian Bahais.... Not at all an irrelevant observation in this context, especially after 691 Bahai fanatics suppressed the formation of a free and open newsgroup a few months ago, talk.religion.bahai.... If there is a series of postings > regarding Rushdie I may or may not choose to participate in them. Those > who wish to follow the decree, in their views, are carrying out their > religious order. In my opinion no human being has the right to take away > the life of another human being, even in the cases of extreme evil acts > such as mass murder (yes... not even Hitler should get the chair). I respect your right to your opinion though I do not share it.... > > In certain countries, including United States, freedom of speech has only > artificial tone to it. Anyone who publishes pro-communist articles/books > in United States, will surely go in the C.I.A blacklist. 20 or 30 years > earlier they would have been put to jail or prosecuted as spies. 50 years > ago Japanese Americans were put in camps for simply being Japanese and > thus a national risk, even those who were in the states for 3 > generations. Pardon me, but this is the usual liberal tripe about the evil USA.... Marxist books in the USA are everywhere today.... And I am one who lived for two full years on the Colorado River Indian Tribes Reservation in Arizona, exactly on the site of a former internment camp.... Yawn.... > > So as you see the laws of each nation are relative, designed to serve the > interests of the particular government. I'm not an anarchist.... so.... As you recall, even United > Nations declared Zionism as being a racist movemnet 40 years ago; > however, today they lifted that definition, making zionism a justifiable > movement and a "good" word! Logic dictates that what is immoral and wrong > will always be wrong, be it in 1950s or 1990s, but that is not what life > plays. Definitions change to suite nations and the powerful. In some > cases these include those holding the gun to your head, or at times those > holding your job hostage. Noone said life is fair, and if you read > between my lines you should get your answer regarding Rushdie. Too obscure for me to agonize over.... Of course, Rushdie's basically leftist, as in Satanic Verses, a paean to that ridiculously bankrupt system.... > > Regarding your second question: yes.. I do consider myself a "secular" > individual, but at the same time dislike putting labels on myself or > others. Well, I don't blame you and sorry for sticking one on you too.... What a world we're forced to inhabit.... > > On the last issue you raised: No.. Bahaism is not the answer to any > problem in Iran. In the contrary it causes more problems than there is. > Any mass conversion to a religion/faith/cult is idiotic at best, and only > shows ignorance and loss of individuality in a society. Maybe 2000 years > ago, an entire nation would convert to a religion because its King would > embrace that religion, but not in 20th century. I respect your opinion. I hold out hope for the 21st century.... > > Your last sub-issue: had this been the destiny of Iran.. then why bother > go through the game of life?:) Your destiny is what you make of it and it > is not pre-written or pre-ordered. Yes, I understand and share that point of view too.... And yet there's a mystery to human life.... > > webmaster@iranvision.com > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > Iran Culture and Information Center > https://www.IranVision.com > Established January 1997 > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > News - Chat - Weather - Art - Pictures - Poetry - Music - Forum - Games > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > IRAN: (old: Persia) n: Land of Aryans (nobles, pure

) > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > > -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- > https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet Best wishes, -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Tue Jun 24 07:51:19 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Tue Jun 24 04:26:02 1997 Received: (qmail 2818 invoked from network); 24 Jun 1997 11:26:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.117) by hm3.hotmail.com with SMTP; 24 Jun 1997 11:26:00 -0000 Message-ID: <33AFAF13.7B62@hotmail.com> Date: Tue, 24 Jun 1997 07:27:15 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,misc.misc,talk.religion.misc,alt.religion,soc.culture.iranian,soc.culture.israel,alt.r eligion.islam CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Iranian "culture" (was Re: False divisions, false unity, and building "Unity in Diversity") References: <5lq916$5ki$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <3381825D.21DB@hotmail.com> <5mfbq6$k2t$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <338C009B.C66@hotmail.com> <5mi8jj$892$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <338D5DFC.427C@hotmail.com> <5o43vr$79i$2@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <33A67EE3.A92@hotmail.com> <866670396.32401@dejanews.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 5583 webmaster@iranvision.com wrote: > > In article <33A67EE3.A92@hotmail.com>, > FG@hotmail.com wrote: > > > Actually, the tenor of Iranian "culture," Bahai and non-Bahai, has > > been represented quite well recently here on alt.religion.bahai by > > the Webmaster of Iranvision.com.... No reification involved.... > > > > -- > > Frederick Glaysher > > UseNet: alt.religion.bahai > > Well Iranian culture is what makes Iranians. Initially I was impressed > with your opposition to the Bahai extremism and censorship. But now I > realize that although you used my experiences with the Bahai censorship > and racism in alt.religion.bahai and regarding soc.religion.bahai, your > motives were of a different nature. You are not really a fighter for > freedom, but are attempting to spread your version of Bahaism based on > your hatred of Iranian culture and society. "Hatred" is not a word I would choose.... Nor would I characterize myself as attempting to "spread" a "version" of "Bahaism." > > What makes Bahaism defective as a "religion" is not the influence of the > Iranian culture, but its own writings and claims which are full of > contradictions and visions of totalitarianism. I think you are right that the Writings are full of contradictions.... At times, I would call them paradoxes.... It may be true that there are visions of totalitarianism too.... Now you can go on and > blame this on other cultures pointing the finger at "Iranian culture". > Your statement is illogical, in a sense that Bahaullah himself was > Iranian, and therefore the issue of Iranian and Bahaism are inseparable. In a sense, yes.... Jesus did not, however, attempt to make all people into Jews.... Paul, among others, helped to cut that cord.... I'm not sure there's ever been an analogous right of passage in the Bahai Faith. It seems still very much an Iranian religion, i.e., one still influenced excessively by the culture and land of its birth.... That's all I'm really saying. I neither "hate" individual Iranian Bahais or the culture as a whole. In fact, I've always especially admired Attar and Rumi, though Rumi failed to achieve what the Irish poet Yeats would have called a Vision of Evil.... > It is analogous to Jesus and the Jews. You cannot say christianity should > not be influenced by Judism and blame the short comings of christianity > on Judism. Although Bahais, as a cult, are well organized, they lack the > essence of logic in their arguements, which in the 20th century makes > them unacceptable as a religion and more acceptable as a cult. I've known highly illogical Bahais.... and all other people for that matter.... A definition of humanity, really.... > > What I represented on the postings relating to Bahaism were in defense of > freedom of speech. I am a supporter of freedom of speech and against > censorship by accetpted religions like Islam, Judaism, and Christianity > or widespread cults such as Davidians or Bahais. Do you support the fatwa against Salman Rushdie? Iranian culture, its basic tenor, as we can talk about the tenor of Chinese, Spanish, or any other culture, does not play a role in that fanatical injustice? Incidentally, to my mind, Rushdie's work contains many brilliant insights into the nature of modern Islam and Iranian "culture." > > In my postings absolutely no issues were discussed regarding Iran as a > society and my postings were aimed at Bahais and none Bahais of all > origins. However, your prejudice of Iranian society makes you conceive > the issues presented by me as an example of Iranian influence in Bahaism > (why I don't know!) and not as a person in defense of freedom of speech. Again, tell me where you stand on Rushdie, and I'll tell you if you're an Iranian I could ever even have the slightest respect for.... And what of the suppression and murder of Bahais in Iran.... Are they allowed freedom of speech? > > Had I been censored from soc.culture.iranian, I still would have written > the same article regarding the such would be moderator. My origin, > religion, or political beliefs are irrelevant in this issue and the > articles I posted regarding Bahaism were not influenced by such. > > Please do not use my articles as evidence supporting your cause, my sole > purpose is defense of Freedom of Speech and not defense of Bahai > ideology. Are you a "secular" Iranian? There have been, in this century, so many secular causes and programs in Iran, all of which have been, well, you describe their results.... I believe the only hope for Iran is for it to convert en masse to the Bahai Faith, embrace the destiny God has given it.... > > webmaster@iranvision.com > and proud to be Iranian with Iranian Culture! > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > Iran Culture and Information Center > https://www.IranVision.com > Established January 1997 > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > News - Chat - Weather - Art - Pictures - Poetry - Music - Forum - Games > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > IRAN: (old: Persia) n: Land of Aryans (nobles, pure

) > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > > -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- > https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Thu May 22 19:34:47 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Thu May 22 13:53:16 1997 Received: (qmail 5806 invoked from network); 22 May 1997 10:50:31 -0000 Received: from ts?rh.metronet.lib.mi.us (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.20) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 22 May 1997 10:50:31 -0000 Message-ID: <33842542.3118@hotmail.com> Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 06:51:46 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc,soc.rights.human CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: False divisions, false unity, and building "Unity in Diversity" References: <5lq916$5ki$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <5lrtir$jck$1@bilbo.reference.com> <5lvcqu$gnj$2@msunews.cl.msu.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 3301 >Donald Zhang Osborn wrote: > >> FG@hotmail.com wrote: > >The most valid reasons people don't participate aren't known>(to you at least) because no one is ever allowed to speak at>"community" meetings unless it's to repeat the usual script.... > In Feasts and community meetings I've experienced, people have > been encouraged to speak. I'm not aware of any "script" being > imposed. What sort of script are you referring to? The usual one.... > > >The so-called "unity" is in reality imposed uniformity.... I>can think of a recent example that was typical of the process... > Sounds like you may have a problem in your community. Have you > contacted your Auxiliary Board member or assistant about it? > Better to take some constructive action than to let it fester. The usual response, too.... > > >You're idealizing what you think their reasons might be. Many,>I know from private conversations, feel contempt and disgust>with the Bahais in "power" and control and are patiently >awaiting a miracle to change the dismal state of the Bahai>community.... > I'm more than a bit puzzled by such references to "power" and > "control" in the Baha'i community. My experience is that > people elected to Spiritual Assemblies have to sacrifice a lot > to serve on them; those individuals are generally happy to serve, > but would not in the least be upset if not elected. So where is > the motive for "power" etc.? If there is some kind of control > going on, then that is a problem that needs to be addressed > directly, through consultation, or if that fails, with the help > of the Auxiliary Board. They don't have any trust, often for good reason, in the Bahai administration.... > > As far as those you say are harboring negative attitudes, I don't > know their situations, but what have they tried to contribute to > their community(ies)? I ask for three reasons: 1) waiting for > something to happen is likely to produce more waiting (no matter > where, unless it's for the seasons to change); Trying to force the issue is not always the best way to go especially when there's no simply solution.... 2) when one wants > to get a point across or make a request of someone, it is often > best to "lead" with an "offer" (one formula has it to "offer, > offer, request"), i.e., not to give something to a person in this > case (of course) but to do something constructive that fills a > need, gets positive attention, and changes the context (however > slightly) one is dealing with; A very constructive, upbeat answer.... and 3) as I used to counsel some > new Peace Corps volunteers trying to work into their job roles, > "create facts" in a positive way -- begin a side project, relate > it to the work of the agency they were working with, become as > "expert" as possible in that area. Unless an individual is > given to complain, there's a lot that can be done better than > nurturing negativity in a passive way. "Facts" are not wanted nor permitted, often.... > > There may also be a communication problem leading to > misperceptions. Anyway, these are just some ideas. Many of the perceptions are quite accurate.... > > DZO > -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Thu May 22 19:34:44 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Thu May 22 13:55:49 1997 Received: (qmail 6269 invoked from network); 22 May 1997 11:52:02 -0000 Received: from ts?rh.metronet.lib.mi.us (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.20) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 22 May 1997 11:52:02 -0000 Message-ID: <338433A7.3AFC@hotmail.com> Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 07:53:11 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc,soc.rights.human,soc.culture.iranian,soc.culture.israel CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: False divisions, false unity, and building "Unity in Diversity" References: <19970521130615.2930.qmail@nym.alias.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 7502 Notarius wrote: > > Donald wrote: > > >False Divisions, False Unity, and Building Unity in Diversity > > > On the Usenet recently there has been a bit of bashing of > >the Baha'i community for certain faults perceived by one or > >another person, including dismissing its unity as "superficial" > >and attempting to negatively categorize different types of > >Baha'is. While no one would claim that the Baha'i community is > >perfect, I would like to put such notions into a different and > >hopefully constructive perspective. > > There are dissenting voices in all religions. These other religions are still > prospering. > Bahais speak openly with their friends in small groups, but not in public. > This is a hindrance. Unity implies that we first speak frankly without fear > and then have a discussion. > We are not honouring the principles of the Faith if problems are kept hidden. > Free speech can then be said to be a duty, not a right. > Thats the constructive perspective, IMO. > > A young Persian girl once told me that her parents often said that all > Europeans were barbarians. > She didnt like their attitude. > The Persians had their own small group. Their attitude was kept hidden, > though some people could feel it. This is the way it is in the USA, in my experience. "Little Iran" in Los Angeles is full of this kind of thing.... > The Persians never voiced their opinion. If they had done so we could > have dealt with the problem. As it was, the thing was kept "hidden". Kept hidden because they're right and YOU are wrong.... No discussion allowed.... > I heard reports from Africa about the same problem. > The believers in Africa were very patient with the Persians, > waiting for them to wise up. > By having their own group, the Persians created disunity. Many THOUSANDS of Americans, I believe, have been driven out of the Bahai Faith by exactly this kind of thing on the part of Iranian Bahais.... > When other bahais talked about this and other problems, they did so > in their own small groups. When all the bahais came together nothing was said. > This is not unity. Just the usual tense fraud.... > > > On the other hand, when differences are used to describe > >divisions or categories, there is the danger of constructing > >false divisions: e.g., "this nationality thinks this way (unlike > >us)"; "most of the community is ignorant (unlike some other > >group)"; there is "this kind" vs. "that kind" of Baha'i; etc. > > Who is creating the differences? In the example above, > the Persians or the critics in this newsgroup? I believe much of the "disunity" is created by the Iranian Bahais themselves. People sense who's really in control, pulling the strings often from the sidelines. Since there are no mechanisms to protect against the abuse of power in the Bahai Faith, Americans and others rightly worried about corruption and exploitation of the whole system.... There are many, many anecdotal stories of this kind of thing.... > > >14 "The only division that is real is this: There are heavenly > >men and earthly men; self-sacrificing servants of humanity in the > >love of the Most High, bringing harmony and unity, teaching peace > >and goodwill to men. On the other hand there are those selfish > >men, haters of their brethren, in whose hearts prejudice has > >replaced loving kindness, and whose influence breeds discord and > >strife." > >Abdu'l-Baha, _Paris Talks_, p. 149 ("The Fifth Principle--The > >Abolition of Prejudices," talk given at 4 Avenue de Camoens, > >Paris, November 13th) > >https://SunSITE.UNC.Edu/Bahai/Texts/English/PT/PT-46.html#Page 149 > > As usual, the Master says it better than I do. > > >19 "Consequently, that which is conducive to association and > >attraction and unity among the sons of men is the means of the > >life of the world of humanity, and whatever causeth division, > >repulsion and remoteness leadeth to the death of humankind." > >Abdu'l-Baha, _Selections from the Writings of `Abdu'l-Baha_, p. > >290 > >https://SunSITE.UNC.Edu/Bahai/Texts/English/SAB/SAB-225.html#Page > >289 > > Again, who causes division? > > > Building unity is not easy. Yet it is central to this Faith > >and we must make our utmost efforts to achieve it. > > Agreed. So, lets solve the problems. I have stated that I have no wars to fight, > except for the issue of free speech. > I want the Faith to prosper. > I mentioned the Persians because the division is so obvious. Blatantly, blatantly so.... Abdu'l-Baha and Baha'u'llah often praised many facets of the West; what we regularly hear from Iranian Bahais is their ignorant backward village attitudes about the West.... > I have seen pioneers of another nationality do almost the same thing. > That was a long time ago and I dont know if the problem still exists. > > >9 "In these days it is incumbent upon everyone to adhere > >tenaciously unto unity and concord and to labor diligently in > >promoting the Cause of God, that perchance the wayward souls may > >attain that which will lead unto abiding prosperity." > >Baha'u'llah, Kalimat-i-Firdawsiyyih (Words of Paradise), _Tablets > >of Baha'u'llah_, p. 60 > >https://SunSITE.UNC.Edu/Bahai/Texts/English/TB/TB-5.html#Page 60 > > >21 "It behoveth man to adhere tenaciously unto that which will > >promote fellowship, kindliness and unity." > >Baha'u'llah, Lawh-i-Dunya (Tablet of the World), _Tablets of > >Baha'u'llah_, p. 89 > >https://SunSITE.UNC.Edu/Bahai/Texts/English/TB/TB-6.html#Page 89 > > Religious people often quote from their Holy Books in order to prove a point. > The idea is the master and the Book is the slave. > You are using quotes to prove your particular point. > I interpret your letter as if we shouldnt mention the Shiite influence > in the Faith. Furthermore, we shouldnt mention that the Persians > are causing some problems around the world. And who, from the sidelines, inspires other Bahais to this effect? Any guesses? I've watched many Iranians cynically use, absolutely use, other Bahais for all kinds of reasons.... > IMHO, the quotes above have a life of their own. They can be used to > support many different opinions, including my own. > > > Sometimes, since we are far from perfect, the results in a > >given area might strike one as being "superficial." Yet if the > >unity in a locality or of the community in a larger area seems > >less than ideal, two steps are important: 1) recognize that this > >is not shameful but a functional step, and 2) that it requires > >awareness and work, not accusations. > > I agree with you. Yet, I talk about problems, > you say that it is a problem that some people talk about problems. > You label it as "accusations". > > > The phrase "unity in diversity" is an important one that has > >been used much among Baha'is (and even non-Baha'is). Our > >commitment to it is only the beginning of making it a reality. > >Our individual actions are but another key part of bringing it > >about. In our efforts we should, IMHO, turn away from false > >divisions and seek to move beyond "false unity." > > It is in working together that there is a lot to be done. > >Fortunately, much in the Baha'i Writings can serve to facilitate > >these efforts. > > Absolutely, Donald. -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Thu May 15 07:10:12 1997 >From dopost@grunt.dejanews.com Thu May 15 04:02:04 1997 Received: (from dopost@localhost) by grunt.dejanews.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id GAA15746; Thu, 15 May 1997 06:01:15 -0500 Path: grunt.dejanews.com!not-for-mail Date: Thu, 15 May 1997 06:01:10 -0600 From: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: For the record ... Newsgroups: talk.religion.misc,alt.religion.bahai,misc.misc Message-Id: <863693461.15452@dejanews.com> Organization: Deja News Usenet Posting Service To: FG@hotmail.com References: <5jl7q4$cmd$1@bilbo.reference.com> <5joa7h$rr5$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <862064131.24380@dejanews.com> <5lci4f$l5s$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> X-Article-Creation-Date: Thu May 15 10:51:02 1997 GMT X-Originating-IP-Addr: 199.179.42.122 () X-Http-User-Agent: Mozilla/3.0Gold (Win95; U) X-Authenticated-Sender: FG@hotmail.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 2541 [This is a courtesy copy of an article posted to Usenet via Deja News] In article <5lci4f$l5s$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu>, Donald Zhang Osborn wrote: > > Just wanted to clear the air on a couple of items, for the > record. > > On 26 Apr 1997 13:56:53 GMT FG@hotmail.com wrote: > > . . . . Your carrying > >of that parties' line so conscientiously, Donald, . . . > > I'm not aware of any party (or parties) or any (party) line. In > any event, I have like others contributed what I believed to be > true and relevant on these issues, not what anyone else told me > or encouraged me in any way to write. Any implication to the > contrary is, well, inappropriate... > > On Sat, 26 Apr 1997 09:21:08 -0600 FG@hotmail.com wrote: > >Fare well, Donald. You've been an interesting voice, more > >intelligent than most Bahais who have participated.... > > Thank you for your conciliatory remarks, but even if I were > worthy of the compliment I cannot accept it as it puts others in > a negative light. This is a matter of principle about what I > have for some time referred to as a "gratuitous remark"-- i.e., > something which could just as easily not be said and leave every > one better off (e.g., if A says to B "You're doing a great job, > much better than C" the negative comparison to C is gratuitous: > 1) it does not help B, 2) it may hurt C when it gets back to > him/her, 3) if B accepts the remark uncritically, it could be a > source of misunderstanding with C, and 4) if B is perceptive, > he/she will realize that A could just as easily say the same sort > of thing about him/her to someone else later and therefore will > trust A less). Gratuitous remarks are not specifically > prohibited in the Baha'i Writings as far as I'm aware, but my > personal understanding is that they are against the spirit of the > teachings and thus try to avoid using them. Shoghi Effendi refers to a non-Bahai someplace as a "low-born Christian woman." In the Priceless Pearl, Abdu'l-Baha is reported to have called passers-by in the street "gilded dirt." Are these gratuitous remarks? I've never said such things.... > > I apologize both for bringing this up and for not having done so > sooner. Anyway, this voice will finally *really* be off Usenet > soon enough... > > DZO -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet From - Mon Jun 02 07:25:51 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Mon Jun 2 03:05:11 1997 Received: (from root@localhost) by f47.hotmail.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id DAA28312; Mon, 2 Jun 1997 03:04:39 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199706021004.DAA28312@f47.hotmail.com> Received: from 199.179.42.117 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Mon, 02 Jun 1997 03:04:38 PDT X-Originating-IP: [199.179.42.117] From: "Frederick Glaysher" To: ncwright@earthlink.net Cc: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: For the record ... Content-Type: text/plain Date: Mon, 02 Jun 1997 03:04:38 PDT X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 1523 This is the only message I have from you in my mailbox today. I replied to something by you on alt.religion.bahai yesterday. Maybe you haven't sent it yet to me? Let me know what's what and I'll be happy to respect your wishes.... Fred -- >From ncwright@earthlink.net Sun Jun 1 17:58:24 1997 >Received: from LOCALNAME (ip189.philadelphia8.pa.pub-ip.psi.net [38.26.64.189]) >by germany.it.earthlink.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id RAA25222; >Sun, 1 Jun 1997 17:58:18 -0700 (PDT) >Message-ID: <33923836.53A4@earthlink.net> >Date: Sun, 01 Jun 1997 20:04:22 -0700 >From: "Nona C. Wright" >Reply-To: ncwright@earthlink.net >X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win16; I) >MIME-Version: 1.0 >To: FG@hotmail.com >Subject: Re: For the record ... >References: <"sHQR5D.A.NrF.xGoez"@bounty> <19970515174535.25668.qmail@nym.alias.net> <337C3D78.2E9@pop.hotmail.com> <5lv92d$gnj$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <338439BC.4B05@hotmail.com> <338F6D8F.21FC@earthlink.net> <33918A1E.21A1@hotmail.com> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > >Frederick, > >I have written you a reply privately but would like your assurances that >it will stay private as it contains details of my personal life that I >don't want to share with Usenet. > >Let me know > >Nona > --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Mon Jun 02 07:25:53 1997 >From ncwright@earthlink.net Mon Jun 2 03:19:59 1997 Received: from LOCALNAME (ip137.philadelphia7.pa.pub-ip.psi.net [38.26.63.137]) by norway.it.earthlink.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id DAA17892; Mon, 2 Jun 1997 03:19:54 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3392BBA7.1C9C@earthlink.net> Date: Mon, 02 Jun 1997 05:25:11 -0700 From: "Nona C. Wright" Reply-To: ncwright@earthlink.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win16; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Frederick Glaysher Subject: Re: For the record ... References: <199706021004.DAA28312@f47.hotmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 3480 Frederick Glaysher wrote: > > This is the only message I have from you in my mailbox today. > I replied to something by you on alt.religion.bahai yesterday. > Maybe you haven't sent it yet to me? Let me know what's what > and I'll be happy to respect your wishes.... > > Fred I held it back pending hearing form you. Here it is. Nona > > The Faith is not an Iranian religion. It was sent for the world. And > > every cultural group is going to have to go through painful changes and > > self examination before this is all worked out. > > I completely disagree. The Bahai Faith, in my twenty-one years of > experience of it, is not a world religion but definitely a narrow, > stifling little would-be Iranian religion, through and through.... > I'm not just attempting to be argumentative.... I believe this is > the unignorable truth, carefully concealed under the image of > liberal, progressive claims and propaganda.... But Frederick, you have also said you are in for the long haul, that you can never see yourself leaving. The Faith I am speaking about is that one, the one that keeps you up at night and posting here. I recognise and acknowledge your love for that one. I can identify. Possibly my own personal struggles have kept me preoccupied and I have not noticed these things that disturb you so. Also it is not a major problem here. We have only one Iraninan on our Assembly, and he is so remarkedly different than any I have known. Stands out like a sore thumb, in a positive way. Was the only person, when my little hyperactive boys would disrupt feast, who went out of his way to set me at ease and reasure me that they were just being children. When I got myself in a big mess of trouble, pregnant outside my marriage and so consumed with guilt that I was considering giving my child up to try and save the marriage, had the insight to remind me that the marriage still might not work and then I wouldn't have my child either. And he was right. Thanks to him and one other man on the Assembly who stood up and advocated for me and my child, both my boys are with me where they should be. Never judged. Always was a true friend. When I was in poverty my boys would not have had clothes if he and his late wife hadn't given me their son's hand me downs. Has gone out of his way to make my son feel welcome and a part of the community. This guy doesn't act like a westerner or an Iranian. He acts like a Baha'i. So I know it can be done. Just like I know from being privy to personal cases just how steeped in the negative aspects of Iranian culture some Iranians can be. In fact unfortunately the majority in my experience. The Faith that you and I love is bigger than all this. I confess that I was worried that alt.religion.bahai would be quickly taken over by covenant breakers. This has not happened, which says to me 1) There is a possiblilty that there is some Divine protection here because 2) This stuff needs to be aired for the Faith to develope. They killed John Brown because he was a radical abolitionist. I am understanding more and more where your frustration comes from. I still have difficulty personally with the extremes of your language but in the large sceme of things after all the dust settles, it may be the kick in the pants we need. I can't follow suit, it is not in my nature. But hope you find some support in my quieter way of saying things. Nona From - Tue Jun 03 07:30:30 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Mon Jun 2 04:36:34 1997 Received: (qmail 12085 invoked from network); 2 Jun 1997 11:36:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.117) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 2 Jun 1997 11:36:33 -0000 Message-ID: <3392B090.39F1@hotmail.com> Date: Mon, 02 Jun 1997 07:37:52 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: ncwright@earthlink.net CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: For the record ... References: <199706021004.DAA28312@f47.hotmail.com> <3392BBA7.1C9C@earthlink.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 440 Thanks, Nona. I appreciate and respect the privacy of your message.... I know it's true too, in fairness and balance.... Let me carefully delete all of the personal passages and respond to it on alt.religion.bahai.... I think others could benefit from hearing your opinions too, minus your personal struggles, as you say.... I think you have a good sense of where I'm really coming from.... Let me know. Best wishes, Fred From - Wed Jun 04 07:20:13 1997 >From ncwright@earthlink.net Tue Jun 3 10:04:46 1997 Received: from LOCALNAME (ip144.philadelphia8.pa.pub-ip.psi.net [38.26.64.144]) by germany.it.earthlink.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id KAA03586; Tue, 3 Jun 1997 10:04:10 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <33946C1D.205@earthlink.net> Date: Tue, 03 Jun 1997 12:10:22 -0700 From: "Nona C. Wright" Reply-To: ncwright@earthlink.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.01 (Win16; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: For the record ... References: <199706021004.DAA28312@f47.hotmail.com> <3392BBA7.1C9C@earthlink.net> <3392B090.39F1@hotmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 1608 Fred, I am still thinking about this. Have almost convinced myself it is ok. Meanwhile wanted to share a story with you. Years ago during consultation about the possiblility of a Naw Ruz dinner dance, one old Persian gentleman was persistantly argueing against it, giving all kinds of superficial suggestions as to why it was a bad idea. Finally in exasteration one of the mature Black women members of the community said. "What is your real problem? You just have something against dancing, don't you?" Shut him right up. Apparently there is a thing against dancing among some Persians because it has been associated with houses of ill repute and immorality in Iran. So what we need to do is teach lots of agressive no nonsense Black women who have no problem speaking their minds, and let the cultural clash begin!!! BTW, this woman spent many years serving on the local assembly, was very deepened and always gave us much food for thought at feast. Thought you would enjoy this. I have to go back to work now but will write you soon with an answer. Hang in there Nona Frederick Glaysher wrote: > > Thanks, Nona. I appreciate and respect the privacy of your > message.... I know it's true too, in fairness and balance.... > > Let me carefully delete all of the personal passages and > respond to it on alt.religion.bahai.... I think others > could benefit from hearing your opinions too, minus > your personal struggles, as you say.... > > I think you have a good sense of where I'm really coming > from.... > > Let me know. Best wishes, > > Fred From - Fri May 16 06:27:08 1997 >From glaysher@pop.hotmail.com Thu May 15 11:59:10 1997 Received: (qmail 18133 invoked from network); 14 May 1997 20:14:50 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.126) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 14 May 1997 20:14:50 -0000 Message-ID: <337A1D52.1CF9@pop.hotmail.com> Date: Wed, 14 May 1997 16:15:14 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: glaysher@pop.hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,misc.misc,talk.religion.misc,soc.culture.israel,soc.culture.iranian,alt.religion,soc.r ights.human Subject: Re: For the record ...alt.religion.bahai References: <5jl7q4$cmd$1@bilbo.reference.com> <5joa7h$rr5$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <862064131.24380@dejanews.com> <5lci4f$l5s$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 3478 Donald Zhang Osborn wrote: > > Just wanted to clear the air on a couple of items, for the > record. > > On 26 Apr 1997 13:56:53 GMT FG@hotmail.com wrote: > > . . . . Your carrying > >of that parties' line so conscientiously, Donald, . . . > > I'm not aware of any party (or parties) or any (party) line. In > any event, I have like others contributed what I believed to be > true and relevant on these issues, not what anyone else told me > or encouraged me in any way to write. Any implication to the > contrary is, well, inappropriate... I'm not convinced.... It seems to me there has definitely been a narrowly defined set of acceptable ideas that you have adhered to quite predictably.... I don't believe it is "inappropriate" to point out rigidity of of thinking when it seems to be there.... Your comments, to my mind, usually reflect what I've thought of lately as basically a Shiite interpretation of the Bahai Faith.... One that dismisses the more enlightened ideas of Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha in favor of totalitarian control over people's lives and thoughts. > > On Sat, 26 Apr 1997 09:21:08 -0600 FG@hotmail.com wrote: > >Fare well, Donald. You've been an interesting voice, more > >intelligent than most Bahais who have participated.... > > Thank you for your conciliatory remarks, but even if I were > worthy of the compliment I cannot accept it as it puts others in > a negative light. This is a matter of principle about what I > have for some time referred to as a "gratuitous remark"-- i.e., > something which could just as easily not be said and leave every > one better off (e.g., if A says to B "You're doing a great job, > much better than C" the negative comparison to C is gratuitous: > 1) it does not help B, 2) it may hurt C when it gets back to > him/her, 3) if B accepts the remark uncritically, it could be a > source of misunderstanding with C, and 4) if B is perceptive, > he/she will realize that A could just as easily say the same sort > of thing about him/her to someone else later and therefore will > trust A less). Gratuitous remarks are not specifically > prohibited in the Baha'i Writings as far as I'm aware, but my > personal understanding is that they are against the spirit of the > teachings and thus try to avoid using them. Against "the spirit of the teachings" according to you.... One should never hurt anyone's feelings? It's all right to intimate or accuse others of being covenant breakers or call them "crud" but you won't comment on that.... Tacitly, you accept it, as long they're on your "side"? I've been a Bahai for twenty years, Donald, and know, like you, that there are an awful lot of stupid, literal-minded, fanatical Bahais.... It's time somebody speak up, instead of letting them run (ruin) the show, so to speak.... > > I apologize both for bringing this up and for not having done so > sooner. Anyway, this voice will finally *really* be off Usenet > soon enough... For the record, Donald, and you realize it, I made the above statements several weeks ago.... I don't retract them though. There are a lot of unintelligent Bahais in my experience.... It has often seemed to me that they are the only ones some individuals in the Bahai Faith like to have around.... compliant sheep, easily malleable.... > > DZO -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Thu May 22 19:34:34 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Thu May 22 13:49:30 1997 Received: (qmail 2340 invoked from network); 21 May 1997 12:29:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.119) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 21 May 1997 12:29:24 -0000 Message-ID: <3382EAEA.2D56@hotmail.com> Date: Wed, 21 May 1997 08:30:34 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc,alt.religion,soc.culture.iranian,soc.culture.israel CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: For the record ...alt.religion.bahai References: <5jl7q4$cmd$1@bilbo.reference.com> <5joa7h$rr5$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <862064131.24380@dejanews.com> <5lci4f$l5s$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <337A1D52.1CF9@pop.hotmail.com> <5lsrvq$sgl$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 12282 Donald Zhang Osborn wrote: > > Frederick Glaysher wrote: > >Donald Zhang Osborn wrote: > [snip] > >> On 26 Apr 1997 13:56:53 GMT FG@hotmail.com wrote: > FG>> > . . . . Your carrying > >> >of that parties' line so conscientiously, Donald, . . . > >> > DZO>> I'm not aware of any party (or parties) or any (party) line. In > >> any event, I have like others contributed what I believed to be > >> true and relevant on these issues, not what anyone else told me > >> or encouraged me in any way to write. Any implication to the > >> contrary is, well, inappropriate... > > > FG>I'm not convinced.... > > Not convinced of what? That I wrote "what I belived to be true and > relevant on these issues"? Then you actually think that I might have > written what I didn't believe? That's simply ridiculous. Or that I > did not write what anyone else told or encouraged me to write? Then > you actually think that I might be taking orders from someone to write > this or that? That's also ridiculous. I'm not sure of the original context but I suppose I meant I'm not convinced you're not simply repeating the "script." > > Please consider the implications that even such a short sentence can > have. What you've done in effect is 1) to insult me, though that may > not have been your intention, and 2) made yourself seem unreasonable. > I was not trying to insult you and hope you would not take it that way. "I'm not convinced" does read like an insult to me.... Alas, I'm human, and I have the capacity to be unreasonable, but I don't believe I am being so there.... > > ... It seems to me there has definitely been a > >narrowly defined set of acceptable ideas that you have adhered to > >quite predictably.... > > Predictable & "narrowly defined" might be seen as being consistent. > "Acceptable ideas"? Not sure what you're referring to here unless it > is reference to earlier postings about courtesy and use of words. > Anyway, it's hard to reply to such a general impression. > > > I don't believe it is "inappropriate" to point > >out rigidity of of thinking when it seems to be there.... > > What you did, and what I objected to, was to imply that I was carrying > some kind of "party line," whatever that was. If you had wanted to > call attention to some supposed "rigidity of thinking," then you could > have found a way of expressing that clearly (with an explanation of > what "rigidity of thinking" is supposed to mean) and without > gratuitous sideswipes (explicit or implicit) at ideas or people or > institutions that are not germane to that issue. I think things are getting a little convoluted here, Mr. Osborn.... with all respect.... > > > . . . Your > >comments, to my mind, usually reflect what I've thought of lately > >as basically a Shiite interpretation of the Bahai Faith.... > > A new pigeonhole? I've not found such labels to be in any way > helpful, but admit that this one is an improvement over some earlier > ones. Pigeonhole? Label? No, I think more accurately defined terminology of the position of many in the Bahai Faith.... > > On the other hand, it assumes that Shi'a Islam has only one way of > looking at the world, and by using the term in a negative context > could be taken as insulting Shiite Muslims. I'm sure that wasn't your > intention, but please beware of the implications of what you write. Well, I wouldn't want to insult the Shiites! They might issue a fatwa against me! They don't fool around with discussing freedom of speech, etc.... Just like a lot of Bahais, who issue their own fatwas.... > > > . . . One > >that dismisses the more enlightened ideas of Baha'u'llah and > >Abdu'l-Baha . . . > > What you've just done here is to imply that some of the Revelation of > Baha'u'llah, and the writings of Abdu'l-Baha, are less enlightened. I > assume this is not what you intended. Once again, please think about > the implications of what you write. It seems to me that some passages are less enlightened than others. Baha'u'llah apparently thought so too when He dropped all kinds of fanaticism from the Bab.... I personally wish He would have dropped a little more.... but that's only MHO. > > In any event, the charge that someone is willfully ignoring sections > of the Writings to serve some ulterior motive is pretty severe. Is > that what you are accusing me or other individuals of? I definitely believe there are individuals who willfully, as you put it, ignore sections of the Writings because they do not suit their designs.... You'll have to speak for yourself.... Abdu'l-Baha is unequivocal in many passages on liberty and freedom of speech yet those are always, systematically, dismissed in favor of the more Iranian passages.... > For the record, I understand the Baha'i Writings to form a whole, one > which we can investigate by parts, but must try to understand as a > system. It's not always easy, and different facets of the teachings > will become clear as human society evolves. Nevertheless, there are > some principles which stand out and will always do so, even if our > capacity to understand and put them into practice needs to be more > developed: unity, justice, abolition of prejudice, independent > investigation of truth, courtesy, love, etc. The truth is they're not understood as a whole, in my opinion, but only in a distorted way that highlights the more totalitarian principles, it seems.... > > > . . . in favor of totalitarian control over people's lives > >and thoughts. > > This is hyperbole. I can't imagine anyone in the Baha'i community who > has the least thought of, let alone any trace of interest in any such > control, and any Baha'i would agree that such control is contrary to > the Teachings. I don't believe it's hyperbole.... I wish I could believe you're right.... Ever read Machiavelli? I soberly recommend The Prince.... > > [snip] > >> . . . . Gratuitous remarks are not specifically > >> prohibited in the Baha'i Writings as far as I'm aware, but my > >> personal understanding is that they are against the spirit of the > >> teachings and thus try to avoid using them. > > > >Against "the spirit of the teachings" according to you.... One > >should never hurt anyone's feelings? It's all right to intimate or > >accuse others of being covenant breakers or call them "crud" but > >you won't comment on that.... Tacitly, you accept it, as long they're > >on your "side"? > > There have been some embarassing reactions to some of your postings by > individual Baha'is (I can think of three), and perhaps I should have > taken the time to comment on those (I did comment on them > disapprovingly at some point, though not directly). There are no > "sides," of course, though many people (not only Baha'is) reacted to > the sometimes extreme (my term) content and wording of your postings, > not always in a Baha'i-like way (and I may also be guilty of that). Boy, are you ever back-peddling, as they say.... > > >I've been a Bahai for twenty years, Donald, and know, like you, > >that there are an awful lot of stupid, literal-minded, fanatical > >Bahais.... > > No, Frederick, I don't "know" that, and with all due respect, neither > do you. Speaking for myself, Mr. Osborn, oh yes I do.... and HOW.... You may perceive it (though frankly you would do better to > express your opinion in a more constructive & less hurtful way); I > perceive something altogether different. Baha'is reflect the society > they live in, though with some differences: there is belief that > Baha'u'llah is who He says He is, and an acceptance of His Covenant. > This in turn means commitment to the principles and laws He set forth--which in many ways distinguishes Baha'is. The practice is not > perfect, by any means (as any Baha'i would tell you), but that doesn't > make people "stupid." > > As for "literal-minded," I'm not sure what you're talking about. Some > of the Writings naturally have to be read literally, as with laws: for > example, prohibition of adultery, backbiting, alcohol & drug > consumption, holy war; the laws of fasting, obligatory prayer -- all > are literal or they are nothing at all. Teachings such as abolition > of prejudice and equality of women and men are also unambiguous, > though the way to implement them requires a lot of thought and > imagination, as well as faith. To be "literal-minded" on these > matters is good. How do you see one being "literal-minded" in a > negative way in the Faith? Like the fundamentalists in Islam, Christianity, Hinduism, and so on, many Bahais are extremists and zealots.... It seems to be encouraged in them by others.... > > As for being "fanatical"... my dictionary says that means: "marked by > excessive enthusiasm and often intense uncritical devotion." I don't > think that there are many such individuals in the Baha'i faith. I do.... > Anyway, since, as the Baha'i Writings say, moderation is preferable to > excess, and reason and faith must go together, fanaticism would not go > well with the Faith. In practice, it does.... It's allowed and used by some.... Yet one should not discourage enthusiasm and > devotion: an ideal path might be to seek to embody "pure enthusiasm > and intense devotion." (These qualities must be mentioned in the > Seven Valleys.) > > > . . . It's time somebody speak up, instead of letting them run > >(ruin) the show, so to speak.... > > It's always time for all Baha'is to speak up, but not against others. > No one is "running (ruining) the show" except for all of us. You have > things to say. Please do those ideas, as well as the rest of us, the > justice of presenting them with care and courtesy. You're at a loss to refute me so you have to revert back to the old accusation that I'm rude and lacking courtesy? > > >For the record, Donald, and you realize it, I made the above > statements > >several weeks ago.... I don't retract them though. There are a lot > >of unintelligent Bahais in my experience.... It has often seemed to > >me that they are the only ones some individuals in the Bahai Faith > >like to have around.... compliant sheep, easily malleable.... > > Sometimes, often, Frederick, I really wonder what you're talking > about. Then I wonder why you say it in such a way that seems to plead > for arguement rather than learning (except that you once wrote about > being "provocative" in your postings). God put drama in the human soul.... Why does man always want to remove it? Dostoevsky understood this better than anyone else.... > First of all, what makes one "unintelligent" in your estimation? Lack > of college education? Devotion to the Faith? Pursuit of spiritual > growth in a way different from you? > > Second, who are these "some individuals" who like to have compliant > people around? I've been a Baha'i quite a while, and I can't think of > anyone like that, or who has a malleable sheep-like approach to the > Faith. I can immediately think of 600+ of them, and many others too.... I see a lot of individuals, often with great creativity (I > don't mean just artists or scholars--all Baha'is have to be somewhat > creative in adapting their lives to the Teachings in no matter what > society they live in this world, and I think often these days about > the work Baha'i parents do to infuse family life with the Teachings), > being, becoming, and doing Baha'i in their own way (at their own speed > & in confomity with their needs and capacities). I respect the inculcation of transcendence in the lives of the young.... As long as it does lead to fanaticism, which Abdu'l-Baha comments on somewhere.... > > DZO With all respect for your intentions and capacities, Mr. Osborn, -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Thu May 22 19:34:42 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Thu May 22 13:53:53 1997 Received: (qmail 6113 invoked from network); 22 May 1997 11:30:03 -0000 Received: from ts?rh.metronet.lib.mi.us (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.20) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 22 May 1997 11:30:03 -0000 Message-ID: <33842E87.62FC@hotmail.com> Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 07:31:19 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc,alt.religion,soc.culture.iranian,soc.culture.israel CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: For the record ...alt.religion.bahai References: <5jl7q4$cmd$1@bilbo.reference.com> <5joa7h$rr5$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <862064131.24380@dejanews.com> <5lci4f$l5s$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <337A1D52.1CF9@pop.hotmail.com> <5lsrvq$sgl$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <3382EAEA.2D56@hotmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 622 My apologies. Yesterday somehow I left out "not" by mistake, typing fast.... > > > > Please consider the implications that even such a short sentence can > > have. What you've done in effect is 1) to insult me, though that may > > not have been your intention, and 2) made yourself seem unreasonable. > > > > I was not trying to insult you and hope you would not take it that way. > "I'm not convinced" does [NOT]read like an insult to me.... Alas, I'm human, > and I have the capacity to be unreasonable, but I don't believe I am > being so there.... > -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Sun Sep 07 09:00:39 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Sun Sep 7 05:57:46 1997 Received: (qmail 11858 invoked from network); 7 Sep 1997 12:57:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.121) by hm3.hotmail.com with SMTP; 7 Sep 1997 12:57:19 -0000 Message-ID: <3412A4F8.749A@hotmail.com> Date: Sun, 07 Sep 1997 08:58:32 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Forwarding of "Service of Women" on Bahai Institutions Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------5B02026D20" X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 93656 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------5B02026D20 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Upon request, I am forwarding a paper on the service of women on Bahai institutions. -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. --------------5B02026D20 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii; name="Service of Women1.htm" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="Service of Women1.htm" Content-Base: "file:///D|/files/Postings/Service%20of %20Women1.htm" >From - Sun Sep 07 07:41:53 1997 >From bn872@freenet.carleton.ca Sat Sep 6 04:01:31 1997 Received: from freenet5.carleton.ca.carleton.ca (bn872@freenet5.carleton.ca [134.117.136.25]) by freenet1.carleton.ca (8.8.6/8.8.6) with ESMTP id HAA08364 for ; Sat, 6 Sep 1997 07:01:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: (bn872@localhost) by freenet5.carleton.ca.carleton.ca (8.8.5/NCF-Sun-Client) id HAA03568; Sat, 6 Sep 1997 07:01:50 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 6 Sep 1997 07:01:50 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <199709061101.HAA03568@freenet5.carleton.ca.carleton.ca> From: bn872@freenet.carleton.ca (McKenny Michael) To: FG@hotmail.com Subject: [PIERCEED@sswdserver.sswd.csus.edu: 1/ Re: Service of Women paper, 4 parts] Reply-To: bn872@freenet.carleton.ca X-Mozilla-Status: 0001 Content-Length: 22915 ================= Begin forwarded message ================= From: PIERCEED@sswdserver.sswd.csus.edu ("Eric D. Pierce") To: bahai-st@jcccnet.johnco.cc.ks.us Subject: 1/ Re: Service of Women paper, 4 parts Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 17:11:35 PST8PDT In the Baha'i Studies List today: On 5 Sep 97 at 12:14, bahai-st@jcccnet.johnco.cc.ks wrote: > From: Self > To: bahai-st@jcccnet.johnco.cc.ks.us > Subject: Service of Women paper, 4 parts > Send reply to: pierceed@csus.edu > Date sent: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 12:14:10 PST8PDT > ----------------------------------------------- > see 4 attachments for "Service of Women" paper. > ----------------------------------------------- > > Attachments: > N:\DOCUMENT\PERSONAL\MISC\SRVWMN.2B > N:\DOCUMENT\PERSONAL\MISC\SRVWMN.2D > N:\DOCUMENT\PERSONAL\MISC\SRVWMN.2C > N:\DOCUMENT\PERSONAL\MISC\SRVWMN.2A Folks, I am posting this per Michael McKinney's request. I have broken it up into 4 parts. Please note that at least one of the authors has expressed some change of view in the 10 years since the paper was written, and another, Juan Cole, has more recently distributed another paper refining the points in the original. EP ---------------------------------------------------------------------- part 1 of 4 ================= Begin forwarded message ================= From: bn872@freenet.carleton.ca (McKenny Michael) To: talisman@umich.edu Cc: irfan@umich.edu, bahai-st@johnco.cc.ks.us Subject: Service of Women Paper Date: Thu, 04 Sep Greetings, from Ottawa. I have received a request for the SERVICE OF WOMEN paper. Here it is: [originally written 1988?] The Service of Women on the Institutions of the Baha'i Faith Anthony A. Lee, Peggy Caton, Richard Hollinger, Marjan Nirou, Nader Saiedi, Shahin Carrigan, Jackson Armstong-Ingram, and Juan R. I. Cole. >From 1844, the year of the founding of the Babi religion, to the present day, women have played important roles in Baha'i history. Babi and Baha'i women have often acted as leaders in the community, holding its highest positions and participating in its most important decisions. In the first days of His Revelation, the Bab Himself appointed Qurratu'l-'Ayn, Tahirih, as one of His chief disciples - one of the nineteen Letters of the Living who were the first to believe in Him and were entrusted by Him with the mission of spreading His Faith and shepherding its believers. This remarkable woman would soon become one of the most radical and influential of the Bab's disciples and the leader of the Babis of Karbala. Her vision and achievement have become legend. [1] In later periods of Baha'i history, women have acted in central roles of leadership within the community. Bahiyyih Khanum, the Greatest Holy Leaf, the sister of 'Abdu'l-Baha, several times in her lifetime was called upon to act as the de facto head of the Baha'i Faith. When 'Abdu'l-Baha left the Holy Land to travel to the West, for example, He chose to leave the affairs of the Cause in the hands of His sister. Likewise, immediately after the ascension of 'Abdu'l-Baha - before Shoghi Effendi, the new Guardian, could arrive in Palestine to assume control of the Faith, the Greatest Holy Leaf assumed leadership. The Baha'is in the Holy Land instinctively turned to her as their guide and protector. And again, during the Guardian's absences from his duties during the early years of his ministry, he repeatedly entrusted the affairs of the Cause to the Greatest Holy Leaf. [2] After the passing of Shoghi Effendi, women were once more called upon to serve the Baha'i Faith at its highest levels. The international leadership of the religion fell to the Hands of the Cause, the chief stewards of the Faith who had been appointed by the Guardian during his lifetime. The women Hands served along with the men to guide the Baha'i community through the turbulent years preceding the election of the Universal House of Justice. Once again, Baha'i women demonstrated their capacity to administer the affairs of the Faith at its highest levels. THE BAHA'I PRINCIPLE OF GRADUALISM. Nonetheless, the service of women on the elected institutions of the Baha'i Faith has emerged only gradually. Although a few exceptional Baha'i women have always set the example for their sex, the role of women on Baha'i institutions in the community as a whole has not been comparable to that of men. Traditional notions of inequality, as well as the restrictions of a hostile environment, have caused the participation of women to lag behind. Even to the present day, the participation of women on National Spiritual Assemblies, Boards of Counsellors, and Auxiliary Boards is not equal to that of men, as the charts show. A long road has yet to be travelled. Participation of Women in Baha'i Institutions "The equality of men and women is not, at the present time, universally applied. In those areas where traditional inequality still hampers its progress we must take the lead in practicing this Baha'i principle. Baha'i women and girls must be encouraged to take part in the social, spiritual and administrative activities of their communities." The Universal House of Justice, Ridvan 1984. Numbers of women members of National Spiritual Assemblies 1953 1963 1973 1979 1985 Africa 0 4 58 53 103 Americas 18 82 86 106 131 Asia 0 11 35 33 39 Australasia 5 8 26 24 33 Europe 11 44 40 44 48 World 34 149 245 260 354 The following table shows, by continent, the numbers of National Assemblies with their corresponding numbers of women members indicated by the column headings. For example, column 1, line 1, there are 4 Assemblies in Africa with no women members. 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Africa 4 9 13 6 6 4 1 0 0 0 Americas 1 4 8 10 12 4 1 1 0 0 Asia 5 14 3 3 0 2 0 0 0 0 Australasia 2 6 4 2 2 1 0 0 0 0 Europe 1 4 6 7 1 0 0 1 0 0 World 13 37 34 28 21 11 2 2 0 0 Percentage of Women members of Institutions (Information provided by the Department of Statistics at the Baha'i World Centre, and reprinted from dialogue, volume 1, no. 3 (Summer/Fall 1986), p 31.) The gradual emergence of women on the institutions of the Faith should not come as a surprise, however. Virtually all Baha'i laws and practices have gone through a gradual evolution in Baha'i history. The recognition of the principle of the equality of men and women, and its gradual application in the development of Baha'i Administration is no exception. The principle of progressive revelation, the concept of the gradual emergence of divine purpose, is a universal principle which applies within the dispensation of each Manifestation, as well as between dispensations. Baha'u'llah Himself has explained: Know of a certainty that in every Dispensation the light of Divine Revelation hath been vouchsafed to men in direct proportion to their spiritual capacity. Consider the sun. How feeble its rays the moment it appeareth above the horizon. How gradually its warmth and potency increase as it approacheth its zenith, enabling meanwhile all created things to adapt themselves to the growing intensity of its light. How steadily it declineth until it reacheth its setting point. Were it all of a sudden to manifest the energies latent within it, it would no doubt cause injury to all created things.... In like manner, if the Sun of Truth were suddenly to reveal, at the earliest stages of its manifestation, the full measure of the potencies which the providence of the Almighty hath bestowed upon it, the earth of human understanding would waste away and be consumed; for men's hearts would neither sustain the intensity of its revelation, nor be able to mirror forth the radiance of its light. Dismayed and overpowered, they would cease to exist. [3] The Universal House of Justice has demonstrated how this principle of progressive revelation has applied, and continues to apply, to the implementation of Baha'i law, particularly to the laws of the Kitab-i Aqdas. The Central Figures of the Faith have promulgated these laws only gradually as the condition of the Baha'i community would allow. [4] Similarly, 'Abdu'l-Baha recognised that women could not take their rightful place in the affairs of the world all at once. Throughout history women have been deprived of education and opportunity. Therefore, it was impossible that they would be able to immediately play an equal role in Baha'i life. But 'Abdu'l-Baha has insisted that all distinctions of sex will be erased once women attain proper education and experience. He says: Woman's lack of progress and proficiency has been due to her need for equal education and opportunity. Had she been allowed this equality, there is no doubt she would be the counterpart of man in ability and capacity. [5] In a talk given in New York, 'Abdu'l-Baha again pinpoints education as the key to women's equality: ...if woman be fully educated and granted her rights, she will attain the capacity for wonderful accomplishments and prove herself the equal of man. She is the coadjutor of man; his complement and helpmeet. Both are human, both are endowed with potentialities of intelligence and embody the virtues of humanity. In all human powers and functions they are partners and co-equals. At present in spheres of human activity woman does not manifest her natal prerogatives owing to lack of education and opportunity.[6] In Paris He said: ...the female sex is treated as though inferior, and is not allowed equal rights and privileges. This condition is not due to nature, but to education. In the Divine Creation there is no such distinction. Neither sex is superior to the other in the sight of God. Why then should one sex assert the inferiority of the other...If women received the same educational advantages as those of men, the result would demonstrate the equality of capacity of both for scholarship. [7] On another occasion he made the same point: The only difference between them [ie: men and women] now is due to lack of education and training. If woman is given equal opportunity of education, distinction and estimate of inferiority will disappear. [8] And again: Therefore, woman must receive the same education as man and all inequality be adjusted. Thus, imbued with the same virtues as man, rising through all the degrees of human attainment, women will become the peers of men, and until this equality is established, true progress and attainment for the human race will not be facilitated. [9] It was clearly 'Abdu'l-Baha's position that lack of education and opportunity had relegated woman to an inferior position in society, and that through education and experience all inequalities of sex would be gradually removed. His own policies and actions concerning the service of women on the institutions of the Faith reflected this belief in gradualism. THE FIRST BAHA'I INSTITUTIONS Any investigation of the history of the development of the Baha'i Administrative Order will reveal that Baha'i women only gradually took their place beside the men in this area of service - and not without struggle. This has been especially true in the East, where women were most heavily restricted. But lack of education and other cultural circumstances have affected the participation of women on Baha'i institutions all over the world. The first Hands of the Cause appointed by Baha'u'llah were, for example, all males. 'Abdu'l-Baha appointed no additional Hands, and it was only during the ministry of Shoghi Effendi that women were appointed to this rank. Even so, it has been only Western Baha'i women who have been found qualified for this distinction. At later times, when the first Auxiliary Boards to the Hands of the Cause were appointed, and then the first contingents of Boards of Counsellors, women were included. But circumstances dictated that it be mostly Western women who were appointed, and that their numbers were far fewer than those of men. As the above chart shows, that situation remains the same today. This is not due to any policy of discrimination on the part of the institutions of the Faith, but simply due to historical circumstances. As the position of women improves - especially in Asia and Africa - with respect to education and experience, we can expect that the current situation will change in favour of more participation of women. The House of Justice of Tehran The struggle for the equal participation of women in Baha'i Administration has been played out most dramatically, however, in the arena of the development of local institutions. The first of these bodies was formed in Tehran, Iran, at the initiative of individual believers. In 1873, Baha'u'llah revealed the Kitab-i-Aqdas, the Most Holy Book, His book of laws. Here He established the institution of the House of Justice (bayt al-'adl). The Kitab-i-Aqdas states: The Lord hath ordained that in every city a House of Justice (bayt al-'adl) be established wherein shall gather counsellors to the number of Baha [i.e., nine], and should it exceed this number it does not matter ... It behoveth them to be the trusted ones of the Merciful among men and to regard themselves as the guardians appointed of God for all that dwell on earth. It is incumbent on them to take counsel together and to have regard for the interests of the servants of God, for His sake, even as they regard their own interests, and to choose that which is meet and seemly.[10] In the same book it is written: O ye Men of Justice! (rijal al-'adl) Be ye in the realm of God shepherds unto His sheep and guard them from the ravening wolves that have appeared in disguise, even as ye would guard your own sons. Thus exhorteth you the Counsellor, the Faithful.[11] There are other references in the Kitab-i-Aqdas to the House of Justice (bayt al-'adl) or the Place of Justice (maqarr al-'adl) which define its function and fix some of its revenues. In most cases, these references are not specific but refer to the general concept of a House of Justice rather than a particular institution. The Universal House of Justice has explained: In the Kitab-i-Aqdas Baha'u'llah ordains both the Universal House of Justice and the Local Houses of Justice. In many of His laws He refers simply to "the House of Justice" leaving open for later decision which level or levels of the whole institution each law would apply to.[12] Although the Kitab-i-Aqdas was revealed in 'Akka in 1873, it was withheld for some time by Baha'u'llah before it was distributed to the Baha'is of Iran.[13] It appears that it was not until around 1878 that the Baha'is of Tehran received copies of the book and began to implement some of its laws in their personal lives. Upon reading the Kitab-i Aqdas, Mirza Asadu'llah Isfahani, a prominent Baha'i teacher living in Tehran, was particularly struck by the command of Baha'u'llah that a House of Justice should be established by the Baha'is in every city. Mirza Asadu'llah is an important figure in Baha'i history: he eventually married the sister of 'Abdu'l-Baha's wife; he was (as we shall see) one of the earliest Baha'i teachers sent to America by 'Abdu'l-Baha to instruct the new Western believers and he later accompanied 'Abdu'l-Baha on his travels in Europe. In any case, in 1878 he was the first to undertake the organization of a local House of Justice in Iran. He took the initiative to invite eight other prominent believers to form a body, responding to the laws of the Kitab-i Aqdas, which they referred to as bayt al-'adl (House of Justice) or bayt al-a'zam ( the Most Great House). The organization of this first House of Justice was kept a secret, even from the believers. However, it met sporadically in the home of Mirza Asadu'llah for a couple of years. After consulting with this body, the prominent Baha'i men who had been invited to attend its meetings would seek to take action as individual Baha'i teachers that would implement its decisions. Around 1881, the Tehran House of Justice was reorganized and more members were added. The House adopted a written constitution and pursued its activities with more organization and vigour than before. The constitution mandated, however, that the meetings remain strictly confidential, hidden from the body of the believers. This constitution also assumes that the members of the House would all be men (aqayan). Naturally, considering the social conditions in Iran at the time, no other arrangement was possible. Some of the minutes of this early House of Justice survive today. It was a gathering of the older and more prominent Baha'i men of Tehran. Meetings were attended by invitation only, and at times included fourteen members or more. Eventually, this meeting came to be called the Consultative Gathering (majlis-i shur), while the house where the body met was referred to as the House of Justice (bayt al-'adl). These meetings sought to assist and protect the Baha'is through consultation on various problems. The House in Tehran sent Baha'i teachers to other cities in Iran to organize Houses of Justice there. Again, the decisions of the House were always carried out by individuals, and the consultations remained secret. The organization of this body eventually met with some controversy. One important Baha'i teacher, Jamal-i Burujurdi, who later - in the time of 'Abdu'l-Baha - would become a notorious Covenant-breaker, objected strongly to the organization of a House of Justice in Tehran. Because of these objections, the Baha'is involved on the House appealed to Baha'u'llah for guidance. Baha'u'llah replied with a Tablet in which He approved of the House of Justice and strongly upheld the principle of consultation in the Baha'i Faith. [14] continued in part 2 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Eric D. Pierce Information Technology Consultant Client-Server Database/PC Network Server Student Services Lassen Hall 1008 California State University, Sacramento Sacramento, CA 95819 - USA desk phone (916) 278-7586 internet email: PierceED@csus.edu la casa (home): EPierce@ns.net - To switch to the digested list, send the following commands to major@johnco.cc.ks.us in the message body - unsubscribe bahai-st subscribe bahai-st-digest -- "My name's McKenny, Mike McKenny, Warrant Officer, Solar Guard." (Tom Corbett #1 STAND BY FOR MARS p2) --------------5B02026D20 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii; name="Service of Women2.htm" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="Service of Women2.htm" Content-Base: "file:///D|/files/Postings/Service%20of %20Women2.htm" >From - Sun Sep 07 07:41:38 1997 >From bn872@freenet.carleton.ca Sat Sep 6 03:55:56 1997 Received: from freenet5.carleton.ca.carleton.ca (bn872@freenet5.carleton.ca [134.117.136.25]) by freenet1.carleton.ca (8.8.6/8.8.6) with ESMTP id GAA07884 for ; Sat, 6 Sep 1997 06:54:28 -0400 (EDT) Received: (bn872@localhost) by freenet5.carleton.ca.carleton.ca (8.8.5/NCF-Sun-Client) id GAA02551; Sat, 6 Sep 1997 06:54:27 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 6 Sep 1997 06:54:27 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <199709061054.GAA02551@freenet5.carleton.ca.carleton.ca> From: bn872@freenet.carleton.ca (McKenny Michael) To: FG@hotmail.com Subject: [PIERCEED@sswdserver.sswd.csus.edu: 2/ Re: Service of Women paper, 4 parts] Reply-To: bn872@freenet.carleton.ca X-Mozilla-Status: 0001 Content-Length: 22476 ================= Begin forwarded message ================= From: PIERCEED@sswdserver.sswd.csus.edu ("Eric D. Pierce") To: bahai-st@jcccnet.johnco.cc.ks.us Subject: 2/ Re: Service of Women paper, 4 parts Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 17:13:22 PST8PDT In the Baha'i Studies List today: On 5 Sep 97 at 12:14, bahai-st@jcccnet.johnco.cc.ks wrote: > From: Self > To: bahai-st@jcccnet.johnco.cc.ks.us > Subject: Service of Women paper, 4 parts > Send reply to: pierceed@csus.edu > Date sent: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 12:14:10 PST8PDT > ----------------------------------------------- > see 4 attachments for "Service of Women" paper. > ----------------------------------------------- > > Attachments: > N:\DOCUMENT\PERSONAL\MISC\SRVWMN.2B > N:\DOCUMENT\PERSONAL\MISC\SRVWMN.2D > N:\DOCUMENT\PERSONAL\MISC\SRVWMN.2C > N:\DOCUMENT\PERSONAL\MISC\SRVWMN.2A ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The Service of Women on the Institutions of the Baha'i Faith Anthony A. Lee, Peggy Caton, Richard Hollinger, Marjan Nirou, Nader Saiedi, Shahin Carrigan, Jackson Armstong-Ingram, and Juan R. I. Cole. originally written 1988? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- part 2 of 4 Early Organisation in America When the first rudimentary local Baha'i institutions were organized in the United States, their membership was also confined to men. Later, as various forms of Baha'i organization at the local level became more common, men and women served together. But it was the understanding of the Baha'is at the turn of the century that consultative bodies in the Baha'i community should be composed of men. This understanding became firmly institutionalized in the largest Baha'i communities of New York, Chicago, and Kenosha, Wisconsin, and was sanctioned by 'Abdu'l-Baha. A scholarly history of the beginnings of Baha'i organization in America has yet to be written. Many of the details of these events have yet to be uncovered. However, it appears that the early American Baha'is were moved to form local councils for the first time in 1900, as a consequence of the defection of Ibrahim Kheiralla from the community. Kheiralla, a Lebanese Christian who had been converted to the Baha'i Faith in Egypt by a Persian Baha'i, 'Abdu'l-Karim Tihrani, had brought the Baha'i teachings to America and had acted as the head of the Faith in the West until that point. His repudiation of 'Abdu'l-Baha as the rightful leader of the Faith and chosen successor to his Father caused a temporary rift among the Baha'is. In the fall of 1899, Edward Getsinger, a leading American Baha'i, appointed five men as a "Board of Counsel" for the Baha'is of northern New Jersey.[15] Isabella Brittingham was made the honorary corresponding secretary, but was not a member of the body. Later, in a letter dated March 21, 1900, Thornton Chase wrote from Chicago: "We have formed a 'Board of Council' with 10 members." In this letter, Chase lists the names of nine of these members, all of whom were men. [16] In June of 1900, however, it appears that the Chicago Board was reorganized. 'Abdu'l-Karim Tihrani had travelled to America at the request of 'Abdu'l-Baha and had arrived in Chicago at the end of May. The Baha'is of Chicago immediately asked him to draw up rules and regulations that would govern the affairs of their Board. As a result, the Board of Counsel was expanded to nineteen members, some of whom were women. In a statement to the press the Baha'is indicated that this Board was being organized to replace Ibrahim Kheiralla, whom they repudiated as the leader of the Faith. [18] Although 'Abdu'l-Karim remained in Chicago for only a short time, his nineteen-member Board appears to have functioned for about a year. However, on May 15, 1901, a nine-member, all-male House of Justice was elected in Chicago to replace it. This was done at the direction of Mirza Asadu'llah Isfahani, who had been sent to America by 'Abdu'l-Baha. Writing to the House of Justice in New York that had already been established, the Chicago House wrote: Recently His Honor, Mirza Assad'Ullah, received a Tablet from the Master, Abdul-Baha, in which He has positively declared to be necessary the establishment here of the House of Justice by election by the believers with order and just dealing. According to this blessed Announcement, our believers have elected those whom they deemed best fitted, and thus The House of Justice was established. [19] It was Mirza Asadu'llah who instructed the Baha'is of Chicago that the new House of Justice should be composed only of men. He and his company appear to have regarded the nineteen-member Board as illegitimate, possibly because women served as members. The change to an all-male institution was not accomplished without anguish. Writing years later, Fannie Lesch, who had served on the Board of Counsel, wrote: We had a Council Board of men and women after Dr. Kheiralla left us... Mirza Assad'Ullah ignored us, although they were all invited to meet with us, and he established a House of Justice of men only...[20] Only days after the election of the Chicago House of Justice, a Ladies' Auxilliary Board was organized at the suggestion of Mrs. Ella Nash and Mrs. Corinne True. This Board was later to be known as the Women's Assembly of Teaching. It appears that the Ladies' Auxilliary was able to maintain control of the funds of the Chicago Baha'i community despite the election of the House of Justice.[21] Men of Justice The belief that women were not eligible for service on local Baha'i institutions was based on the language of certain passages of the Kitab-i Aqdas which refer to the House of Justice. Of course, as we have noted above, these passages do not make a distinction between local, national, and international bodies. The institution as a whole is addressed. Baha'u'llah twice uses the Arabic word rijal (gentlemen) to refer to the members of the Houses of Justice. He says: O ye Men (rijal) of Justice! Be ye in the realm of God shepherds unto His sheep... [22] And: We have designated a third of all fines for the Place of Justice (maqarr al-'adl), and exhort its members (rijal) to show forth perfect equity...[23] The word rijal (plural; singular is rajul) is exclusively masculine in Arabic. A dictionary would render an English definition of rajul as: man, gentleman; important man, statesman, nobleman. (A related form of the word, rujula or rujuliyya, would be translated as: masculinity; virility.) Since Baha'u'llah addressed the members of the Houses of Justice using this term, it appears that it was universally assumed that only men were eligible for service on such institutions. The word rijal, meaning men, is used in the Qur'an and is part of an important passage which establishes the relationship between men and women in Islam (Qur'an 4:34): Men (rijal) are superior to women (nisa') on account of the qualities with which God hath gifted the one above the other, and on account of the outlay they make from their substance for them. However, Baha'u'llah has in His Writings clearly established the principle of the equality of men and women. It is therefore possible that when He used the word rijal He did not intend its normal meaning. Although rijal is the normal Arabic word for men (as opposed to women), there are passages in the Writings of Baha'u'llah that indicate that He may have used the term in a special sense. Such passages suggest that, in a Baha'i context, the word may be understood to include women. Baha'u'llah has stated that women in His Cause are all to be accorded the same station as men - and He has used the very term rijal to make this point. For example, He writes: Today the Baha'i women (lit., the leaves of the Holy Tree) must guide the handmaidens of the earth to the Lofty Horizon with the utmost purity and sanctity. Today the handmaidens of God are regarded as gentlemen (rijal). Blessed are they! Blessed are they! [24] And in another passage: Today whoever among the handmaidens attains the knowledge of the Desire of the World [i.e., Baha'u'llah] is considered a gentleman (rajul) in the Divine Book. [25] And in another place: ...many a man (rajul) hath waited expectant for God's Revelation, and yet when the Light shone forth from the horizon of the world, all but a few turned their faces away from it. Whosoever from amongst the handmaidens hath recognized the Lord of all Names is recorded in the Book as one of those men (rijal) by the Pen of the Most High. [26] Likewise, 'Abdu'l-Baha in one of his Tablets has made the same point: Verily, according to Baha'u'llah, women are judged as gentlemen (rijal). [27] However, such passages were not raised as an issue at the time, either because the believers were not aware of them, or because they did not find them applicable. Certainly, the American Baha'is had no access to these texts and had to rely on the understandings of the Persian teachers who were sent by 'Abdu'l-Baha to guide them. Names and Terminology In any case, it was the goal of Mirza Asadu'llah to establish a House of Justice among the believers in Chicago, as he indicated to the Baha'is that 'Abdu'l-Baha had instructed him to do. He had been at the centre of the organization of the first House of Justice in Tehran, and he assumed a similar role in Chicago. At his direction, the Baha'is in Chicago elected nine men by ballot to a new institution. Those elected were: George Lesch, Charles H. Greenleaf, John A. Guilford, Dr. Rufus H. Bartlett, Thornton Chase, Charles Hessler, Arthur S. Agnew, Byron S. Lane and Henry L. Goodall. [28] At its first meeting, the House of Justice decided to raise the number of its members to twelve. The body appointed three additional Baha'i men to serve. The minutes of the meeting read: Motion made and seconded that Messrs. Ioas, Pursels and Doney be selected as add'n [additional] members of this Board of Council. Said motion approved by Board. Secretary instructed to notify said members. [29] This action was taken, no doubt, in accordance with the statement of Baha'u'llah in the Kitab-i Aqdas that the minimum number of members for a House of Justice is nine, "and should it exceed this number it does not matter." It is instructive to note that, in its first minutes, the secretary of the House of Justice refers to it as a "Board of Council." This illustrates the fluidity of terminology that was used for Baha'i meetings and institutions at the time. Standard terms for the Baha'i institutions did not become fixed and universal until well after the passing of 'Abdu'l-Baha. Today, the elected local and national Baha'i institutions are known as "Spiritual Assemblies," while the term "House of Justice" is reserved exclusively for the supreme, international institution. In the early years of this century, however, though these same terms were in use among the Baha'is, they were not used in the same ways. 'Abdu'l-Baha himself confirmed the legitimacy of the election of the first Chicago House of Justice. A Tablet, probably received in September 1901, is addressed from 'Abdu'l-Baha "To the members of the House of Justice, the servants of the Covenant, the faithful worshippers of the Holy Threshold of the Beauty of El-Abha." Two such Tablets addressed to the House of Justice of Chicago are translated in the compilation Tablets of Abdul-Baha Abbas. [31] Shoghi Effendi, writing much later in 1929, has discussed the significance of these Tablets. He says: That the Spiritual Assemblies of today will be replaced in time by Houses of Justice, and are to all intents and purposes identical and not separate bodies, is abundantly confirmed by 'Abdu'l-Baha Himself. He has in fact in a Tablet addressed to the members of the first Chicago Spiritual Assembly, the first elected Baha'i body instituted in the United States, referred to them as members of the "House of Justice" for that city, and has thus with His own pen established beyond any doubt the identity of the present Baha'i Spiritual Assemblies with the House of Justice referred to by Baha'u'llah. For reasons which are not difficult to discover, it has been found advisable to bestow upon the elected representatives of Baha'i communities throughout the world the temporary appellation of Spiritual Assemblies, a term which, as the position and aims of the Baha'i Faith are better understood and more fully recognised, will gradually be superseded by the permanent and more appropriate designation of House of Justice. [32] This "temporary appellation" was assumed at the instruction of 'Abdu'l-Baha about a year after the election of the Chicago House of Justice. The minutes of the House of Justice for May 10, 1902, read: Mr/ Greenleaf stated that he was instructed by Mirza Assad Ullah to inform this Body that here after and until otherwise informed it shall be known as the "House of Spirituality," in accordance with a Tablet recently received from our Master. Motion made and seconded that the command of Master changing name of this Body as transmitted by Mirza Assad Ullah be entered upon our records. Approved by House. Motion made and seconded that a copy (translation) of that portion of tablet setting forth the change as above mentioned be procured and placed on file. Approved by House. [33] Extracts from this Tablet were indeed translated for the House of Justice, now the House of Spirituality. The heading to the translation indicates that the Tablet was received in Chicago by Mirza Assadu'llah on May 3, 1902. One extract reads: The House of Justice of Chicago should be called "the House of Spirituality" (or the Spiritual House). In short, no one must hurt the weak ones, there, but must treat them in kindness. Because now is the cycle of kindness and forgiveness to all people. [34] In what is apparently a second Tablet on the subject, 'Abdu'l-Baha explained the reasons for the change. This Tablet was, some time later, translated and published: The signature of that meeting should be the Spiritual Gathering (House of Spirituality) and the wisdom therein is that hereafter the government should not infer from the term "House of Justice" that a court is signified, that it is connected with political affairs, or that at any time it will interfere with governmental affairs. Hereafter, enemies will be many. They would use this subject as a cause for disturbing the mind of the government and confusing the thoughts of the public. The intention was to make known that by the term Spiritual Gathering (House of Spirituality), that Gathering has not the least connection with material matters, and that its whole aim and consultation is confined to matters connected with spiritual affairs. This was also instructed (performed) in all Persia. [35] At the same time, and in the original Tablet received on May 3, 'Abdu'l-Baha had instructed that the name of the Women's Assembly of Teaching be changed to the "Spiritual Assembly." He instructed that "Spiritual Assemblies" should be organized in every place. However, although the change of name for the House of Justice was effected immediately, the instruction to change the name of the women's institution was ignored. This is probably because the translation of this command into English was so poor as to render it incomprehensible. And so we read the following in the minutes of the House of Spirituality three years later (July 29, 1905): Mr. Windust read portions of the Tablet received from the Master in May, 1902 authorizing change of name of this body from "House of Justice" to "House of Spirituality"; as it also stated in said Tablet that the name of the Women's "Assembly of Teaching" be changed to "Spiritual Assembly." It was decided that this matter be spoken of at some future joint meeting [with the women's group], as it had evidently been overlooked. [37] As we have seen in the Tablets quoted above, in the first year after the election of the Chicago House of Justice, 'Abdu'l-Baha Himself used various terms to refer to that body. (Of course, we have quoted His Tablets in translation - the translations available to the Baha'is at the time.) These Tablets reflect the use of at least three different designations during this period: House of Justice (bayt al-'adl) in the earliest Tablets, House of Spirituality (probably, bayt-i rawhani) in one Tablet, and Spiritual Gathering (mahfil-i rawhani) in another. This last term, mahfil-i rawhani, can also be translated as "Spiritual Assembly." However, it was usually translated as "House of Spirituality" in the publications and translations made at this time, even though this translation was in error. The Chicago body came to be known as the House of Spirituality from 1902, and so the translators rendered 'Abdu'l-Baha's references to it in these words, even if the original Persian did not warrant such a designation. This was because the term "Spiritual Assembly" had no fixed meaning in the early community and could refer to a number of different Baha'i meetings. 'Abdu'l-Baha had asked, for example, that the term be used for the Ladies' Auxiliary. It was also used by the Baha'is of this time to refer to any Baha'i community as a whole, some weekly teaching meetings, any consultative body, or any gathering of believers. Terms used to designate the local administrative body were also fluid in 'Abdu'l-Baha's writings. In addition to the three designations above, the following additional names can be found: mahfil-i shur (Assembly of Consultation), mahfil-i shur rawhani (Spiritual Assembly of Consultation), bayt al-'adl rawhani (Spiritual House of Justice), anjuman (Council), anjuman-i adl (Council of Justice), and marakiz-i 'adl (Centres of Justice). [38] continued in part 3 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- - To switch to the digested list, send the following commands to major@johnco.cc.ks.us in the message body - unsubscribe bahai-st subscribe bahai-st-digest -- "My name's McKenny, Mike McKenny, Warrant Officer, Solar Guard." (Tom Corbett #1 STAND BY FOR MARS p2) --------------5B02026D20 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii; name="Service of Women3.htm" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="Service of Women3.htm" Content-Base: "file:///D|/files/Postings/Service%20of %20Women3.htm" >From - Sun Sep 07 07:41:43 1997 >From bn872@freenet.carleton.ca Sat Sep 6 03:55:05 1997 Received: from freenet5.carleton.ca.carleton.ca (bn872@freenet5.carleton.ca [134.117.136.25]) by freenet1.carleton.ca (8.8.6/8.8.6) with ESMTP id GAA07948 for ; Sat, 6 Sep 1997 06:55:25 -0400 (EDT) Received: (bn872@localhost) by freenet5.carleton.ca.carleton.ca (8.8.5/NCF-Sun-Client) id GAA02723; Sat, 6 Sep 1997 06:55:25 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 6 Sep 1997 06:55:25 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <199709061055.GAA02723@freenet5.carleton.ca.carleton.ca> From: bn872@freenet.carleton.ca (McKenny Michael) To: FG@hotmail.com Subject: [PIERCEED@sswdserver.sswd.csus.edu: Re: Service of Women paper, 4 parts] Reply-To: bn872@freenet.carleton.ca X-Mozilla-Status: 0001 Content-Length: 22269 ================= Begin forwarded message ================= From: PIERCEED@sswdserver.sswd.csus.edu ("Eric D. Pierce") To: bahai-st@jcccnet.johnco.cc.ks.us Subject: Re: Service of Women paper, 4 parts Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 17:14:39 PST8PDT In the Baha'i Studies List today: On 5 Sep 97 at 12:14, bahai-st@jcccnet.johnco.cc.ks wrote: > From: Self > To: bahai-st@jcccnet.johnco.cc.ks.us > Subject: Service of Women paper, 4 parts > Send reply to: pierceed@csus.edu > Date sent: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 12:14:10 PST8PDT > ----------------------------------------------- > see 4 attachments for "Service of Women" paper. > ----------------------------------------------- > > Attachments: > N:\DOCUMENT\PERSONAL\MISC\SRVWMN.2B > N:\DOCUMENT\PERSONAL\MISC\SRVWMN.2D > N:\DOCUMENT\PERSONAL\MISC\SRVWMN.2C > N:\DOCUMENT\PERSONAL\MISC\SRVWMN.2A ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The Service of Women on the Institutions of the Baha'i Faith Anthony A. Lee, Peggy Caton, Richard Hollinger, Marjan Nirou, Nader Saiedi, Shahin Carrigan, Jackson Armstong-Ingram, and Juan R. I. Cole. originally written 1988? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- part 3 of 4 The Women's Struggle The election of an all-male House of Justice in Chicago was a development to which some of the women in the Baha'i community were never reconciled. It is Corinne True in particular who stands out in the struggle to overturn the exclusion of women from that body. After the election, she immediately helped to organize the Women's Assembly of Teaching which worked side by side with the House - and not always harmoniously - for over a decade. Beyond this, she appealed directly to 'Abdu'l-Baha, asking that women be elected to the House of Justice. Mrs. True's letter, which has recently come to light, indicates clearly that the change to an all-male body was the cause of some dispute. She writes to 'Abdu'l-Baha: There has existed a difference of opinion in our Assembly [that is, the Chicago community] as to how it should be governed. Every believer desires to carry out the Commands of the Blessed Perfection [Baha'u'llah] but we want to know from our Lord himself [that is, 'Abdu'l-Baha] what these Commands are, as they are written in Arabic and we do not know Arabic. Will Our Lord write me direct from Acca and not have it go through any Interpretor [sic] in America and thus grant me the Authority to say the Master says thus & so, for he has written it to me... Many in our Assembly feel that the Governing Board in Chicago should be a mixed Board of both men & women. Woman in America stands so conspicuously for all that is highest & best in every department and for that reason it is contended the affairs should be in the hands of both sexes. [39] She was, however, disappointed when the Master would not support her point of view. He confirmed the practise of electing only males to the Baha'i governing board of Chicago, admonishing her to be patient. She appears to have received her reply from 'Abdu'l-Baha in June of 1902, but refrained from sharing this Tablet with the Chicago House until the fall of that year. The Tablet is a famous one and reads in part (in modern translation): Know thou, O handmaid, that in the sight of Baha, women are accounted the same as men, and God hath created all humankind in His own image, and after His own likeness. That is, men and women alike are the revealers of His names and attributes, and from the spiritual viewpoint there is no difference between them. Whosoever draweth nearer to God, that one is the most favoured, whether man or woman. How many a handmaid, ardent and devoted, hath, within the sheltering shade of Baha, proved superior to the men, and surpassed the famous of the earth. The House of Justice, however, according to the explicit text of the Law of God, is confined to men; this for a wisdom of the Lord God's, which will ere long be made manifest as clearly as the sun at high noon. As to you, O ye other handmaids who are enamoured of the heavenly fragrances, arrange ye holy gatherings, and found ye Spiritual Assemblies, for these are the basis for spreading the sweet savours of God, exalting His Word, uplifting the lamp of His grace, promulgating His religion and promoting His Teachings, and what bounty is there greater than this? [40] Since 'Abdu'l-Baha had confirmed that women should be excluded from the Chicago House of Justice (later, House of Spirituality), this practice continued for some time, in Chicago and elsewhere. We might assume that the belief that women were to be permanently excluded from local Baha'i executive bodies was widespread, at least amongst the men. Women were to be involved in forming women's groups, which 'Abdu'l-Baha had named "Spiritual Assemblies" in one Tablet. That did not end the issue, of course. It appears that American Baha'i women continued to discuss the possibility of membership on governing boards, with Corinne True being prominent among them. In 1909, Mrs. True received a Tablet from 'Abdu'l-Baha in response to her insistent questioning. It reads, in part: According to the ordinances of the Faith of God, women are the equals of men in all rights save only that of membership on the Universal House of Justice [bayt al-'adl 'umumi], for, as hath been stated in the text of the Book, both the head and the members of the House of Justice are men. However, in all other bodies, such as the Temple Construction Committee, the Teaching Committee, the Spiritual Assembly, and in charitable and scientific associations, women share equally in all rights with men. [41] This new Tablet from 'Abdu'l-Baha to Corinne True appears to have opened up a nationwide controversy over the rights of women to serve on Baha'i institutions. The use of the term "Universal House of Justice" in this Tablet caused some confusion. Corinne True and others assumed that 'Abdu'l-Baha intended by this Tablet that women were now to be admitted to membership on local Baha'i bodies, and more particularly to membership on the Chicago House of Spirituality. Thornton Chase related the controversy which erupted in Chicago in a letter written a few months later (January 19, 1910): Several years ago, soon after the forming of the "House of Justice" (name afterward changed by Abdul-Baha to House of Spirituality on account of political reasons - as stated by Him - and because also of certain jealousies) Mrs. True wrote to Abdul-Baha and asked if women should not be members of that House. He replied distinctly, that the House should be composed of men only, and told her that there was a wisdom in this. It was a difficult command for her to accept, and ever since (confidentially) there has been in that quarter and in those influenced by her a feeling of antagonism to the House of Spirituality, which has manifested itself in various forms... ...Mrs True received a Tablet, in which it was stated (in reply to her solicitation) that it was right for women to be members of all "Spiritual Gatherings" except the "Universal House of Justice", and she at once construed this to mean, that women were to be members of the House of Spirituality and the Council Boards, because in some of the Tablets for the House, it had been addressed as the "Spiritual Assembly" or "Spiritual Gathering". But the House of Spirituality could not so interpret the Master's meaning... [42] The difference of opinion was deep and serious. It took place within a wider context of gender tensions within the American Baha'i community at the time. The Chicago House of Spirituality consulted on the new Tablet to Corinne True at its meetings on August 31, 1909, and September 7, 1909. While it seemed clear to them that the Tablet did not admit women to membership on the House of Spirituality, they decided to write to 'Abdu'l-Baha for a clarification of His meaning. [43] It appears that no record of a reply to the House on this point has survived. But, in the event, the practice of excluding women from membership did not change. The men of Chicago assumed that 'Abdu'l-Baha's reference to the "Universal House of Justice" intended the local Chicago institution. This is a reasonable assumption, given the lack of fixed terminology at the time. The word 'umumi, with which 'Abdu'l-Baha qualified His reference to the House of Justice in Arabic, means public, general, or universal. Since it was known that Corinne True had asked about women's service on the Chicago House - which was understood to be a House of Justice, even if designated a House of Spirituality for various reasons - His reply seemed to indicate that only men could serve on the general (or universal) body, while women could serve on all subordinate bodies, such as the Assembly of Teaching, the Philanthropic Association, and so forth. And this is the interpretation of the Tablet that would stand for some years to come. In May of 1910, Thornton Chase wrote to a believer about this question, which was still being debated: As to women being members of the House, there is no question at all. Abdul-Baha's reply to Mrs True years ago, settled that, viz, that the members of the House should be men, and that the time would come when she would see the wisdom of that. This was in direct answer to her question to Him as to this matter. He has never changed that command, and He cannot, because it is the command of Baha'o'llah also, as applied to such bodies of business controllers. But, in a Tablet to me, 'Abdu'l-Baha said "The House of Spirituality must encourage the women as much as possible". There is the whole procedure. "Encourage the women as much as possible". That is what He does: that is what we should do. Not to be members of the H. of S., but to all good works in the Cause, which they can possibly accomplish. It seems to me that the matter of membership in H. of S. should be simply ignored, not talked about, but if it obtrudes itself too strongly, just get out that Tablet to Mrs. True and the one to me (just mentioned) and offer them as the full and sufficient answer. [44] Chase's views are undoubtedly representative of the understandings of the majority of Baha'is at the time. It was the common understanding that the Chicago House of Spirituality was properly composed of men only, and that ultimately all local Baha'i boards should be similarly composed. This was a position which was repeatedly sustained by 'Abdu'l-Baha, but which was never fully accepted by some Baha'i women. In Kenosha, which had had an all-male "Board of Consultation" for some years, the issue of women's service on the Board became a matter of dispute in 1910, as a result of Corinne True's 1909 "Universal House of Justice" Tablet. On July 4, 1910, the Kenosha Board wrote to the House of Spirituality in Chicago asking if they had any Tablets from 'Abdu'l-Baha which instructed that women should be elected to local institutions. They explained that two of the Baha'i ladies in their community had insisted that such Tablets existed. [45] The reply from the House of Spirituality, dated July 23, 1910, is very instructive. [46] The House was able to find three Tablets from 'Abdu'l-Baha which had bearing on the subject. One was the 1909 Tablet to Corinne True which had opened the controversy. Two others had been received from 'Abdu'l-Baha in 1910, in reply to more inquiries. In a Tablet to Louise Waite (April 20, 1910), 'Abdu'l-Baha had instructed: The Spiritual Assemblies which are organized for the sake of teaching the Truth, whether assemblies for men, assemblies for women or mixed assemblies, are all accepted and are conducive to the spreading of the Fragrances of God. This is essential. [47] 'Abdu'l-Baha goes on to state that the time had not come for the establishment of the House of Justice, and he exhorts the men and the women to produce harmony and conduct their affairs in unity. [48] In another Tablet directed to the Baha'is of Cincinnati, where the question of women's participation in local organization had also become an issue, 'Abdu'l-Baha wrote something similar: It is impossible to organize the House of Justice in these days; it will be formed after the establishment of the Cause of God. Now the Spiritual Assemblies are organized in most of the cities, you must also organize a Spiritual Assembly in Cincinnati. It is permissible to elect the members of the Spiritual Assembly from among the men and women; nay, rather, it is better, so that perfect union may result. [49] The House of Spirituality concluded from these Tablets that: ...in organizing Spiritual Assemblies of Consultation now, it is deemed advisable by Abdul-Baha to have them composed of both men and women. The wisdom of this will become evident in due time, no doubt. [50] By this time, Baha'is in different parts of the United States had established a variety of boards and committees as a means of local organization. Women had served on the Washington, D.C., "Working Committee" since its formation in 1907. They had been a part of the Boston "Executive Committee" from its beginning in 1908. Women also acted as officers of communities in places where Baha'is had elected no corporate body. But these were regarded, for the most part, as temporary, ad-hoc organizations not official Baha'i institutions, which were thought to be properly all male. 'Abdu'l-Baha's Tablets recognized all of these local bodies as "Spiritual Assemblies" (or Spiritual Gatherings, mahfil-i rawhani) and by 1910, He was urging that these Assemblies consist of both men and women. The House of Spirituality in Chicago was obviously puzzled by this command, though it expressed confidence that the wisdom of mixed Assemblies would "become evident in due time." However, since it knew that the Kenosha Board of Consultation had been established as an all-male body in accordance with earlier instructions from 'Abdu'l-Baha, the House of Spirituality suggested that the Kenosha Baha'is might wish to take a vote to determine whether a majority of believers would be in favour of a change. [51] Rather than do this, however, the Kenosha Board of Consultation submitted the question to 'Abdu'l-Baha. The "supplication" (as they termed it) was signed by all of the men of the Board. It asked if the Board should be dissolved, to be reelected with women as members. The Board members pledged to the Master that if it was His wish they would dissolve, but they stated that their intentions had been pure at the founding of the Board and that it had been established in accordance with a Tablet that had been revealed for the House of Spirituality some years before. [52] 'Abdu'l-Baha, however, would not support the idea of dissolving the all-male Board. His reply, received March 4, 1911, explains: Now Spiritual Assemblies must be organized and that is for teaching the Cause of God. In that city you have a spiritual Assembly of men and you can establish a spiritual Assembly for women. Both Assemblies must be engaged in diffusing the fragrances of God and be occupied with the service of the Kingdom. The above is the best solution for this problem... [53] As in other Tablets, He stated that conditions for the establishment of the House of Justice did not yet exist, and He urged unity between the men and women of the Baha'i community. And so, through 1911, the status quo that had been established by Mirza Assadu'llah in Chicago in 1901, with the election of the first American House of Justice, held firm. All-male institutions continued to function in the most important Baha'i communities. These were supplemented by parallel women's groups. A variety of committees and boards had been established in smaller Baha'i communities that included women as members, but these were regarded by most Baha'is as only informal groups. While 'Abdu'l-Baha was urging that new "Spiritual Assemblies" include both men and women, He would not sanction the reorganization of the longer-established male bodies. Baha'i women in various parts of the country continued to discuss the need for change. The Change Comes It was not until 1912, during the visit of 'Abdu'l-Baha to America, that a decisive change was finally made. While 'Abdu'l-Baha was in New York, He sent word to the Baha'is of Chicago that the House of Spirituality should be reorganized and a new election held. He chose Howard MacNutt, a prominent Baha'i from Brooklyn, to travel to Chicago as His personal representative. MacNutt was instructed to hold a new election for a "Spiritual Meeting" (probably mahfil-i rawhani) of the Baha'is of Chicago. For the first time, women were eligible for election to this body. MacNutt arrived in Chicago on August 8, 1912. At 'Abdu'l-Baha's instructions, a feast was held on August 10, at the home of Mr. and Mrs. George Lesch, where the entire Chicago Baha'i community was invited to be the guests of 'Abdu'l-Baha. MacNutt delivered to the community 'Abdu'l-Baha's message of unity and love. The election was held the following day on August 11. The Baha'i magazine, Star of the West, carried this account of that historic election: On Sunday evening, the 11th, the Chicago Assembly [meaning here, the whole Baha'i community] selected a "Spiritual Meeting" of nine, composed of men and women, whose service - according to the wish of Abdul-Baha - is, first, to promulgate the teachings of the Revelation, and, second, to attend to other matters necessary to the welfare of the assembly. Mr. MacNutt was present and gave an inspiring address. A long struggle had ended. continued in part 4 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- - To switch to the digested list, send the following commands to major@johnco.cc.ks.us in the message body - unsubscribe bahai-st subscribe bahai-st-digest -- "My name's McKenny, Mike McKenny, Warrant Officer, Solar Guard." (Tom Corbett #1 STAND BY FOR MARS p2) --------------5B02026D20 Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii; name="Service of Women4.htm" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline; filename="Service of Women4.htm" Content-Base: "file:///D|/files/Postings/Service%20of %20Women4.htm" >From - Sun Sep 07 07:41:48 1997 >From bn872@freenet.carleton.ca Sat Sep 6 03:55:59 1997 Received: from freenet5.carleton.ca.carleton.ca (bn872@freenet5.carleton.ca [134.117.136.25]) by freenet1.carleton.ca (8.8.6/8.8.6) with ESMTP id GAA08009 for ; Sat, 6 Sep 1997 06:56:19 -0400 (EDT) Received: (bn872@localhost) by freenet5.carleton.ca.carleton.ca (8.8.5/NCF-Sun-Client) id GAA02857; Sat, 6 Sep 1997 06:56:19 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 6 Sep 1997 06:56:19 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <199709061056.GAA02857@freenet5.carleton.ca.carleton.ca> From: bn872@freenet.carleton.ca (McKenny Michael) To: FG@hotmail.com Subject: [PIERCEED@sswdserver.sswd.csus.edu: 4 (end)/ Re: Service of Women paper, 4 parts] Reply-To: bn872@freenet.carleton.ca X-Mozilla-Status: 0001 Content-Length: 20910 ================= Begin forwarded message ================= From: PIERCEED@sswdserver.sswd.csus.edu ("Eric D. Pierce") To: bahai-st@jcccnet.johnco.cc.ks.us Subject: 4 (end)/ Re: Service of Women paper, 4 parts Date: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 17:16:53 PST8PDT In the Baha'i Studies List today: Sorry about not properly identifying part 3 in the email subject heading. EP On 5 Sep 97 at 12:14, bahai-st@jcccnet.johnco.cc.ks wrote: > From: Self > To: bahai-st@jcccnet.johnco.cc.ks.us > Subject: Service of Women paper, 4 parts > Send reply to: pierceed@csus.edu > Date sent: Fri, 5 Sep 1997 12:14:10 PST8PDT > ----------------------------------------------- > see 4 attachments for "Service of Women" paper. > ----------------------------------------------- > > Attachments: > N:\DOCUMENT\PERSONAL\MISC\SRVWMN.2B > N:\DOCUMENT\PERSONAL\MISC\SRVWMN.2D > N:\DOCUMENT\PERSONAL\MISC\SRVWMN.2C > N:\DOCUMENT\PERSONAL\MISC\SRVWMN.2A ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The Service of Women on the Institutions of the Baha'i Faith Anthony A. Lee, Peggy Caton, Richard Hollinger, Marjan Nirou, Nader Saiedi, Shahin Carrigan, Jackson Armstong-Ingram, and Juan R. I. Cole. originally written 1988? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- part 4 of 4 Baha'i Institutions in the East From the time of the dissolution of the Chicago House of Spirituality and its reelection, service on local Baha'i institutions has always remained open to women in America. 'Abdu'l-Baha had made it perfectly clear that the restrictions placed on women in this regard were intended to be only temporary ones. From that point forward, women were fully integrated into the emerging Baha'i Administration erected in the West. The same was not true in the East, however. In Iran and in the rest of the Muslim world, social conditions made it impossible for the restriction on women's participation on local institutions to be lifted for some time. Local and National Spiritual Assemblies in Iran were limited to male membership during the entire period of the ministry of 'Abdu'l-Baha, and for most of the ministry of Shoghi Effendi. Again, the principle of gradualism was at play. Of course, there were Baha'i women in Iran, as well in the United States, who campaigned for a greater role for women in the Baha'i community. Their concerns were not only with participation on local Houses of Justice, but also with the elimination of other social restrictions, such as the use of the veil in public. In a Tablet to one such woman activist, 'Abdu'l-Baha urged restraint and recommended a gradual approach: The establishment of a women's assemblage (mahfil) for the promotion of knowledge is entirely acceptable, but discussions must be confined to educational matters. It should be done in such a way that differences will, day by day, be entirely wiped out, not that, God forbid, it will end in argumentation between man and women. As in the question of the veil, nothing should be done contrary to wisdom.... Now the world of women should be a spiritual world, not a political one, so that it will be radiant. The women of other nations are all immersed in political matters. Of what benefit is this, and what fruit doth it yield? To the extent that ye can, ye should busy yourself with spiritual matters which will be conducive to the exaltation of the Word of God and of the diffusion of His fragrances. Your demeanour should lead to harmony amongst all and to coalescence and the good-pleasure of all... I am endeavouring, with Baha'u'llah's confirmations and assistance, so to improve the world of the handmaidens [that is, the world of women] that all will be astonished. This progress is intended to be in spirituality, in virtues, in human perfections and in divine knowledge. In America, the cradle of women's liberation, women are still debarred from political institutions because they squabble. (Also, the Blessed Beauty has said, "O ye Men [rijal] of the House of Justice.") Ye need to be calm and composed, so that the work will proceed with wisdom, otherwise there will be such chaos that ye will leave everything and run away. "This newly born babe is traversing in one night the path that needeth a hundred years to tread." In brief, ye should now engage in matters of pure spirituality and not contend with men. 'Abdu'l-Baha will tactfully take appropriate steps. Be assured. In the end thou wilt thyself exclaim, "This was indeed supreme wisdom!" [55] Baha'i women were not admitted to service on the institutions of the Faith in Iran until 1954. But this restriction was understood to be temporary, to be removed as soon as circumstances would permit. As Iranian society allowed a greater role for women in general, and as Baha'i women became more educated and more prepared for administrative service, this restriction was lifted. The Guardian eventually made women's participation on Baha'i institutions in the East one of the goals of the Ten Year World Crusade (1953-1963). His hopes were rewarded by the signal distinction which some Baha'i women have achieved as administrators on local Assemblies and on the National Assembly of Iran. The International House of Justice The only remaining body within the Baha'i Faith whose membership continues to be limited to men is its supreme institution, the Universal House of Justice. First established in 1963, the Universal House of Justice is elected by the members of the National Spiritual Assemblies of the world. Naturally, the electors include many women. But the members of the House of Justice itself, from its inception, have all been male. Shoghi Effendi anticipated that the Universal House of Justice would be established as an all-male body, even though he passed away before he could see this implemented. He did not comment generally on the subject, and he does not seem to have devoted a great deal of time to the issue. But in answer to questions from individual Baha'is, some letters were written on the Guardian's behalf by his secretaries which comment on the composition of the yet-to-be-formed House of Justice. For example, his secretary writes: As regards your question concerning the membership of the Universal House of Justice, there is a Tablet from 'Abdu'l-Baha in which He definitely states that the membership of the Universal House of Justice is confined to men, and that the wisdom of it will be fully revealed and appreciated in the future. In the local, as well as national Houses of Justice, however, women have the full right of membership. It is, however, only to the International House that they cannot be elected. [56] And in another letter: As regards the membership of the International House of Justice, 'Abdu'l-Baha states in a Tablet that it is confined to men, and that the wisdom of it will be revealed as manifest as the sun in the future. [57] Again: Regarding your question, the Master said the wisdom of having no women on the International House of Justice, would become manifest in the future. We have no indication other than this... [58] Again: People must just accept the fact that women are not eligible to the International House of Justice. As the Master says the wisdom of this will be known in the future, we can only accept, believing it is right...[59] The remarkable similarity of these letters to individual believers should be noted. In each case, the Guardian directed his secretary to refer to the Tablet of 'Abdu'l-Baha to Corinne True which was written in reply to her petition that women be elected to the Chicago House of Justice. This Tablet explains that the reason for the exclusion of women will become manifest in the future. Subsequent events demonstrated that 'Abdu'l-Baha had intended that this exclusion be only temporary - an exclusion that would be followed by the full participation of women on this body. The exclusion of women from the Universal House of Justice today is observed by the Baha'i community primarily in obedience to these letters of the Guardian. Most Baha'is assume that this exclusion was intended to be a permanent one. However, since this instruction of the Guardian is tied so closely to the meaning of the one Tablet of 'Abdu'l-Baha which promises that the wisdom of the exclusion of women will become manifest in the future, and since it is known that the meaning of the Tablet was that women should be excluded only temporarily from the Chicago House, the assumption that women will be permanently excluded from the current Universal House of Justice may be a faulty one. A temporary exclusion may be intended. The answer to this question, as with all other questions in the Baha'i community, will have to be worked out over time. The elements of dialogue, struggle, persistence and anguish which are so evident in the history of the gradual participation of women on local Baha'i administrative bodies will, no doubt, all attend the working out of that answer in the future. These elements are all present today. A Tablet of Assurance 'Abdu'l-Baha repeatedly assured Baha'i women in His writings that the women of the future would achieve full and complete equality with men. In one of these Tablets He refers to the composition of the House of Justice. The Tablet is dated August 28, 1913, and it appears to have been written to a Baha'i woman in the East. In it, 'Abdu'l-Baha repeats His promise: In this Revelation of Baha'u'llah, the women go neck and neck with the men. In no movement will they be left behind. Their rights with men are equal in degree. They will enter all the administrative branches of politics. They will attain in all such a degree as will be considered the very highest station of the world of humanity and will take part in all affairs. Rest ye assured. Do ye not look upon the present conditions; in the not far distant future the world of women will become all-refulgent and all-glorious, FOR HIS HOLINESS BAHA'U'LLAH HATH WILLED IT SO! At the time of the elections the right to vote is the inalienable right of women, and the entrance of women into all human departments is an irrefutable and incontravertible question. No soul can retard or prevent it... As regards the constitution of the House of Justice, Baha'u'llah addresses the men. He says: "O ye men of the House of Justice!" But when its members are to be elected, the right which belongs to women, so far as their voting and their voice is concerned, is indisputable. WHEN THE WOMEN ATTAIN TO THE ULTIMATE DEGREE OF PROGRESS, THEN, ACCORDING TO THE EXIGENCY OF THE TIME AND PLACE AND THEIR GREAT CAPACITY, THEY SHALL OBTAIN EXTRAORDINARY PRIVILEGES. Be ye confident on these accounts. His Holiness Baha'u'llah has greatly strengthened the cause of women, and the rights and privileges of women is one of the greatest principles of 'Abdu'l-Baha. Rest ye assured! [60] (Final emphasis added.) Notes 1. Nabil-i A'zam, The Dawn-Breakers, Wilmette, Ill.: Baha'i Publishing Trust, 1932, pp 80-81, 270-71. 2. See, for example, Ruhiyyih Rabbani, The Priceless Pearl, London: Baha'i Publishing Trust, 1969, pp 39-42 and 57-58; Baha'i Administration, Wilmette, Ill.: Baha'i Publishing Trust, 1928, pp 25-26. 3. The Universal House of Justice, A Synopsis and Codification of the Kitab-i-Aqdas, the Most Holy Book of Baha'u'llah, Haifa: Baha'i World Centre, 1973, p 5. 4. Ibid., pp 3-7. 5. 'Abdu'l-Baha, The Promulgation of Universal Peace, Wilmette, Ill.: Baha'i Publishing Trust, 1922-25 (1982), pp 136-37. 6. Ibid., pp 136-37. 7. 'Abdu'l-Baha, Paris Talks, London: Baha'i Publishing Trust, 1912, p 161. 8. Promulgation, p 174. 9. Ibid., p 375. 10. Synopsis, p 13. 11. Ibid., p 16. 12. Ibid., p 57. 13. Ibid., pp 5-6. 14. All information in this section concerning the first House of Justice of Tehran is based on Ruhu'llah Mihrabkhani, Mahafil-i shur dar 'ahd-i Jamal-i Aqdas-i Abha, (Assemblies of consultation at the time of Baha'u'llah) in Payam-i Baha'i, nos. 28 and 29, pp 9-11 and pp 8-9 respectively. 15. Minutes of the North Hudson, N.J., Board of Counsel, National Baha'i Archives, Wilmette, Ill. 16. Chase to Blake, 21/3/00, Chase Papers, National Baha'i Archives. 17. Regulations relating to the Chicago Board of Council (Abdel Karim Effendi), Albert Windust Papers, National Baha'i Archives. 18. Kenosha Evening News, 29/6//00, p 1. 19. House of Justice in Chicago to House of Justice in New York, 23/5/01, House of Spirituality Papers, National Baha'i Archives. 20. Fannie Lesch, "Dr. C. I. Thatcher, Chicago, Illinois", (an obituary), Albert Windust Papers, National Baha'i Archives. 21. Minutes of the House of Justice (Chicago), 26/1/02 and 28/6/01. House of Spirituality Papers, National Baha'i Archives. 22. Marzieh Gail and Fadil-i Mazandarani (trans.), typescript translation of the Kitab-i Aqdas. 23. Ibid. 24. Quoted in Ahmad Yazdani, Mabadiy-i Ruhani, Tehran: Baha'i Publishing Trust, 104 Badi', p 109. 25. Ibid 26. Women: Extracts from the Writings of Baha'u'llah, 'Abdu'l-Baha, Shoghi Effendi, and the Universal House of Justice, comp. by The Research Department of the Universal House of Justice, Thornhill, Ont.: Baha'i Canada Publications, 1986, #7, p 3. 27. Quoted in Ahmad Yazdani, Maqam va Huquq-i Zan dar Diyanat-i Baha'i, vol. 1, Tehran: Baha'i Publishing Trust, 107 Badi'. 28. Minutes of the House of Spirituality, 24/5/01, House of Spirituality Papers, National Baha'i Archives. 29. Ibid., 20/5/01. 30. Synopsis, p 13. 31. Tablets of Abdul-Baha Abbas, Chicago: Baha'i Publishing Society, 1909, vol 1, p 3. 32. Shoghi Effendi, World Order of Baha'u'llah, Wilmette, Ill.: Baha'i Publishing Trust, 1938, p 6. 33. Minutes of 10/5/02, House of Spirituality Papers, National Baha'i Archives. 34. Extract from the Tablet of the Master, 'Abdu'l-Baha, to Mirza AssadUllah, received in Chicago on the 3rd of May, 1902. House of Spirituality Papers. National Baha'i Archives. 35. Tablets of Abdul Baha Abbas, p 6. 36. The translation reads "We named the assemblies of teaching in Chicago the Spiritual Assemblies; you should organize spiritual assemblies in every place"; ( extract from the Tablet from the Master, se note 35 above). 37. Minutes, 29/7/05, House of Spirituality Papers, National Baha'i Archives. 38. See various published Tablets and public talks of 'Abdu'l-Baha, including: Kitab-i baday 'u'l-athar, Bombay, 1921, vol.1, pp 65, 119, 120, 251; and 39. True to 'Abdu'l-Baha, 25/2/02, Document 11137, International Baha'i Archives, Haifa, Israel. 40. Selections from the Writings of 'Abdu'l-Baha, Haifa: Baha'i World Centre, 1978, pp 79-80. 41. 'Abdu'l-Baha to Corinne True, 24/7/09, microfilm, National Baha'i Archives. 42. Chase to Remey, 19/1/10, Chase Papers, National Baha'i Archives. 43. Minutes, 31/8/09 and 7/9/09, House of Spirituality Papers, National Baha'i Archives. 44. Chase to Scheffler, 10/5/10, Chase papers, National Baha'i Archives. 45. Bahai Assembly of Kenosha to House of Spirituality, 4/7/10, House of Spirituality Papers, National Baha'i Archives. 46. House of Spirituality (Albert R. Windust, LIbrarian) to Board of Consultation, Kenosha, Wis., 23/7/10, House of Spirituality Papers, National Baha'i Archives. 47. Ibid. 48. Ibid. 49. Ibid. 50. Ibid. 51. Ibid. 52. Kenosha Assembly to Albert Windust, 16/5/11, House of Spirituality Papers, National Baha'i Archives. 53. 'Abdu'l-Baha to the members of the Spiritual Assembly and Mr. Bernard M. Jacobsen, Kenosha, Wis., 4/5/11, House of Spirituality Papers, National Baha'i Archives. 54. Star of the West, vol. 3, no. 10 (August 20, 1912) p 16. See also, 'Abdu'l-Baha's instructions to Howard MacNutt, August 6, 1912, microfilm collection, National Baha'i Archives. 55. Women, #11, pp 6-7. 56. Letter written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi, dated July 28, 1936, Baha'i News, No. 105 (February 1937) p 2. 57. Letter written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi, dated December 14, 1940, quoted in Dawn of a New Day (New Delhi: Baha'i Publishing Trust, n.d.) p 86. 58. Letter written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi, dated September 17, 1952, Baha'i News, No 267 (May 1953) p 10. 59. Letter written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi, dated July 15, 1947, quoted in "Extracts on Membership of the Universal House of Justice" (an unpublished compilation of the Universal House of Justice). 60. Quoted in Paris Talks (London: Baha'i Publishing Trust, 1912) pp 182-83. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- -end- Eric D. Pierce Information Technology Consultant Client-Server Database/PC Network Server Student Services Lassen Hall 1008 California State University, Sacramento Sacramento, CA 95819 - USA desk phone (916) 278-7586 internet email: PierceED@csus.edu la casa (home): EPierce@ns.net - To switch to the digested list, send the following commands to major@johnco.cc.ks.us in the message body - unsubscribe bahai-st subscribe bahai-st-digest -- "My name's McKenny, Mike McKenny, Warrant Officer, Solar Guard." (Tom Corbett #1 STAND BY FOR MARS p2) --------------5B02026D20-- From - Thu May 29 05:59:13 1997 >From fran@schubert.crhc.uiuc.edu Wed May 28 12:16:37 1997 Received: (from fran@localhost) by schubert.crhc.uiuc.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id OAA08354; Wed, 28 May 1997 14:18:04 -0500 (CDT) Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 14:18:04 -0500 (CDT) From: Fran Baker Message-Id: <199705281918.OAA08354@schubert.crhc.uiuc.edu> To: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Fundamentalism Cc: fran@schubert.crhc.uiuc.edu Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-MD5: tSdaGpMA7aoiMTtP5oq7Og== X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 869 > Wow! What a great suggestion. That's it! Alcoholics Anon for Iranian > Bahais detoxicing from their oppressive, fanatical culture.... Who > knows, it might work.... Fred, In my observation, the problem in America is the meeting up of the Iranian cultural legacy with the American fundamentalist lagacy (or the forces that nourish it). The most obnoxious Bahai's I know are not Iranians but rather Americans who could as easily be Christian or Islamic fundamentalists in a different setting. They are the most controlling people I have ever met. I think Iranian culture is a bit of a red herring in the discussion of the ruination of the Baha'i religion, unless you are willing to see it in the Faith's founders and scriptures as well. I think your anger is somewhat misplaced. If I have offended you by saying this, I apologize. --Fran From - Thu May 29 07:52:38 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Thu May 29 04:09:48 1997 Received: (qmail 20649 invoked from network); 29 May 1997 11:09:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.121) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 29 May 1997 11:09:47 -0000 Message-ID: <338D6448.270F@hotmail.com> Date: Thu, 29 May 1997 07:11:04 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Fran Baker CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Fundamentalism References: <199705281918.OAA08354@schubert.crhc.uiuc.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 1185 Fran Baker wrote: > > > Wow! What a great suggestion. That's it! Alcoholics Anon for Iranian > > Bahais detoxicing from their oppressive, fanatical culture.... Who > > knows, it might work.... > > Fred, > > In my observation, the problem in America is the meeting up of the > Iranian cultural legacy with the American fundamentalist lagacy > (or the forces that nourish it). The most obnoxious Bahai's I know > are not Iranians but rather Americans who could as easily be Christian > or Islamic fundamentalists in a different setting. They are the most > controlling people I have ever met. > > I think Iranian culture is a bit of a red herring in the discussion > of the ruination of the Baha'i religion, unless you are willing to see > it in the Faith's founders and scriptures as well. I think your > anger is somewhat misplaced. If I have offended you by saying this, > I apologize. > > --Fran Would you consider posting this to alt.religion.bahai so that I could respond in public? I'd appreciate it. You say some worthwhile things here that others might benefit from.... including myself.... -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Thu May 29 17:22:38 1997 >From fran@schubert.crhc.uiuc.edu Thu May 29 12:23:08 1997 Received: (from fran@localhost) by schubert.crhc.uiuc.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id OAA09373; Thu, 29 May 1997 14:26:07 -0500 (CDT) Date: Thu, 29 May 1997 14:26:07 -0500 (CDT) From: Fran Baker Message-Id: <199705291926.OAA09373@schubert.crhc.uiuc.edu> To: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Fundamentalism Cc: fran@schubert.crhc.uiuc.edu Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-MD5: fU1v4KB5u1e0umgaBZ1cGw== X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 3119 > > Would you consider posting this to alt.religion.bahai so that I could > respond in public? I'd appreciate it. You say some worthwhile things > here that others might benefit from.... including myself.... > -- > Frederick Glaysher > UseNet: alt.religion.bahai > Dear Fred, I did post on Irfan and H-Bahai, and it was a good experience. I don't do it much any more because (1) I got a lot off my chest there, though obviously not all and (2) I always feel it's a little inappropriate for someone who is a nonbeliever to be in these discussion; I question my own motives...am I just trying to unconvert all the smart Baha'is? Just FYI, my main problems with the Faith are 1) the idea and uses of the idea of Progressive Revelation, which I find an unoriginal, historically false, and self-serving doctrine, 2) the idea and uses of the idea of Covenant Breaking and the treatment of CBs, which is a true cancer in the religion and completely unnecessary 3) a tortured relationship with the truth, which appears in many ways, including self-serving sound-bites (especially when it comes to "unity" of humanity, "truth" of all religions), inconsistencies, hiding of dirty laundry, ulterior motive (of conversion) in words and deeds, censorship and fear of free discussion, obsession with making a good impression or converting others with selective information, 4) focus on an individual (Baha'u'llah), who was imperious and intolerant, and a "holy family" (a distinct subset of the actual family), 5) miscellaneous individual issues, including homophobia, anti-intellectualism, sexism, capital punishment and the branding of thieves (talk about barbaric!), militaristic imagery, superstition (e.g., miracles, omens, numerology), traces of anti-Semitism, seeing animals as soulless, etc. 6) the collective expectation (delusion?) of an "entry by troops" and associated theocratic visions and lavish building projects. The Persian literary style is also not to my taste, and I think its excesses may contribute to the growing fundamentalism. The whole thing just doesn't seem to be what "our day" needs, though I agree that we need nonmaterialistic (spiritual, attitudinal) solutions to many of our problems. This does not have to be religious or religion-specific. As you can see, the Baha'i Faith really pushes my buttons! Aaargh. I hope I haven't pushed too many of yours in telling as it really is between me and this religion! I very much do not want to offend you personally or to hurt the feelings of anyone in my husband's family by saying too much in public. The Bakers are wonderful people in whom I have never seen the problems described above. This is the main thing that inhibits me; they have been very kind to me. Only Frank knows how I groan when the "American Baha'i" arrives! If I were a Baha'i myself, I would be more vocal publically. Thank you for seeing some value in my opinions. As long as you have the spirit to fight, fight on!! (I know you will.) Fran Member, Agnostics for Baha'i Free Speech, Midwest Chapter From - Fri May 30 05:50:47 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Thu May 29 14:21:20 1997 Received: (from root@localhost) by f15.hotmail.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id OAA00978; Thu, 29 May 1997 14:20:46 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199705292120.OAA00978@f15.hotmail.com> Received: from 199.179.42.132 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Thu, 29 May 1997 14:20:45 PDT X-Originating-IP: [199.179.42.132] From: "Frederick Glaysher" To: fran@crhc.uiuc.edu Cc: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Fundamentalism Content-Type: text/plain Date: Thu, 29 May 1997 14:20:45 PDT X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 4364 >From fran@schubert.crhc.uiuc.edu Thu May 29 12:23:08 1997 >Received: (from fran@localhost) by schubert.crhc.uiuc.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id OAA09373; Thu, 29 May 1997 14:26:07 -0500 (CDT) >Date: Thu, 29 May 1997 14:26:07 -0500 (CDT) >From: Fran Baker >Message-Id: <199705291926.OAA09373@schubert.crhc.uiuc.edu> >To: FG@hotmail.com >Subject: Re: Fundamentalism >Cc: fran@schubert.crhc.uiuc.edu >Mime-Version: 1.0 >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >Content-MD5: fU1v4KB5u1e0umgaBZ1cGw== > > >> >> Would you consider posting this to alt.religion.bahai so that I could >> respond in public? I'd appreciate it. You say some worthwhile things >> here that others might benefit from.... including myself.... >> -- >> Frederick Glaysher >> UseNet: alt.religion.bahai >> > >Dear Fred, > >I did post on Irfan and H-Bahai, and it was a good experience. >I don't do it much any more because (1) I got a lot off my chest >there, though obviously not all and (2) I always feel it's a little >inappropriate for someone who is a nonbeliever to >be in these discussion; I question my own motives...am I >just trying to unconvert all the smart Baha'is? > >Just FYI, my main problems with the Faith are 1) the idea and uses >of the idea of Progressive Revelation, which I find an unoriginal, >historically false, and self-serving doctrine, 2) the idea and uses of the >idea of Covenant Breaking and the treatment of CBs, which is a true cancer >in the religion and completely unnecessary 3) a tortured relationship with >the truth, which appears in many ways, including self-serving sound-bites >(especially when it comes to "unity" of humanity, "truth" of all religions), >inconsistencies, hiding of dirty laundry, ulterior motive (of conversion) in >words and deeds, censorship and fear of free discussion, obsession >with making a good impression or converting others with selective >information, 4) focus on an individual (Baha'u'llah), who was imperious >and intolerant, and a "holy family" (a distinct subset of the >actual family), 5) miscellaneous individual issues, including >homophobia, anti-intellectualism, sexism, capital punishment and >the branding of thieves (talk about barbaric!), militaristic imagery, >superstition (e.g., miracles, omens, numerology), traces of anti-Semitism, >seeing animals as soulless, etc. 6) the collective expectation (delusion?) >of an "entry by troops" and associated theocratic visions and lavish >building projects. > >The Persian literary style is also not to my taste, and I think >its excesses may contribute to the growing fundamentalism. > >The whole thing just doesn't seem to be what "our day" needs, though I >agree that we need nonmaterialistic (spiritual, attitudinal) solutions to >many of our problems. This does not have to be religious or religion-specific. > >As you can see, the Baha'i Faith really pushes my buttons! Aaargh. >I hope I haven't pushed too many of yours in telling as it really is >between me and this religion! I very much do not want to offend you >personally or to hurt the feelings of anyone in my husband's family >by saying too much in public. The Bakers are wonderful people in whom >I have never seen the problems described above. This is the main >thing that inhibits me; they have been very kind to me. Only Frank >knows how I groan when the "American Baha'i" arrives! > >If I were a Baha'i myself, I would be more vocal publically. Thank you >for seeing some value in my opinions. As long as you have the >spirit to fight, fight on!! (I know you will.) > >Fran >Member, Agnostics for Baha'i Free Speech, Midwest Chapter > There isn't a whole lot here I disagree with you on, Fran. Others need to hear opinions on the Bahai Faith that aren't under the control of.... It would be nice to respond in public, throttled as it is and has been by the voter abuse.... How about if I respond to this and the last message of yours after removing all names and identifying allusions to your husband, etc., "as a request for annonymity"? -- Fred --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Jun 01 09:54:54 1997 >From fran@schubert.crhc.uiuc.edu Fri May 30 13:11:11 1997 Received: (from fran@localhost) by schubert.crhc.uiuc.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id PAA10267; Fri, 30 May 1997 15:14:10 -0500 (CDT) Date: Fri, 30 May 1997 15:14:10 -0500 (CDT) From: Fran Baker Message-Id: <199705302014.PAA10267@schubert.crhc.uiuc.edu> To: fran@crhc.uiuc.edu, FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Fundamentalism Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-MD5: ZRo/WmesJpqWP6ZH1PYLlQ== X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 6161 > From FG@hotmail.com Thu May 29 16:21:20 1997 > X-Originating-IP: [199.179.42.132] > From: "Frederick Glaysher" > To: fran@crhc.uiuc.edu > Cc: FG@hotmail.com > Subject: Re: Fundamentalism > Date: Thu, 29 May 1997 14:20:45 PDT > > > > >From fran@schubert.crhc.uiuc.edu Thu May 29 12:23:08 1997 > >Received: (from fran@localhost) by schubert.crhc.uiuc.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id > OAA09373; Thu, 29 May 1997 14:26:07 -0500 (CDT) > >Date: Thu, 29 May 1997 14:26:07 -0500 (CDT) > >From: Fran Baker > >Message-Id: <199705291926.OAA09373@schubert.crhc.uiuc.edu> > >To: FG@hotmail.com > >Subject: Re: Fundamentalism > >Cc: fran@schubert.crhc.uiuc.edu > >Mime-Version: 1.0 > >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii > >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > >Content-MD5: fU1v4KB5u1e0umgaBZ1cGw== > > > > > >> > >> Would you consider posting this to alt.religion.bahai so that I could > >> respond in public? I'd appreciate it. You say some worthwhile things > >> here that others might benefit from.... including myself.... > >> -- > >> Frederick Glaysher > >> UseNet: alt.religion.bahai > >> > > > >Dear Fred, > > > >I did post on Irfan and H-Bahai, and it was a good experience. > >I don't do it much any more because (1) I got a lot off my chest > >there, though obviously not all and (2) I always feel it's a little > >inappropriate for someone who is a nonbeliever to > >be in these discussion; I question my own motives...am I > >just trying to unconvert all the smart Baha'is? > > > >Just FYI, my main problems with the Faith are 1) the idea and uses > >of the idea of Progressive Revelation, which I find an unoriginal, > >historically false, and self-serving doctrine, 2) the idea and uses of the > >idea of Covenant Breaking and the treatment of CBs, which is a true cancer > >in the religion and completely unnecessary 3) a tortured relationship with > >the truth, which appears in many ways, including self-serving sound-bites > >(especially when it comes to "unity" of humanity, "truth" of all religions), > >inconsistencies, hiding of dirty laundry, ulterior motive (of conversion) in > >words and deeds, censorship and fear of free discussion, obsession > >with making a good impression or converting others with selective > >information, 4) focus on an individual (Baha'u'llah), who was imperious > >and intolerant, and a "holy family" (a distinct subset of the > >actual family), 5) miscellaneous individual issues, including > >homophobia, anti-intellectualism, sexism, capital punishment and > >the branding of thieves (talk about barbaric!), militaristic imagery, > >superstition (e.g., miracles, omens, numerology), traces of anti-Semitism, > >seeing animals as soulless, etc. 6) the collective expectation (delusion?) > >of an "entry by troops" and associated theocratic visions and lavish > >building projects. > > > >The Persian literary style is also not to my taste, and I think > >its excesses may contribute to the growing fundamentalism. > > > >The whole thing just doesn't seem to be what "our day" needs, though I > >agree that we need nonmaterialistic (spiritual, attitudinal) solutions to > >many of our problems. This does not have to be religious or religion-specific. > > > >As you can see, the Baha'i Faith really pushes my buttons! Aaargh. > >I hope I haven't pushed too many of yours in telling as it really is > >between me and this religion! I very much do not want to offend you > >personally or to hurt the feelings of anyone in my husband's family > >by saying too much in public. The Bakers are wonderful people in whom > >I have never seen the problems described above. This is the main > >thing that inhibits me; they have been very kind to me. Only Frank > >knows how I groan when the "American Baha'i" arrives! > > > >If I were a Baha'i myself, I would be more vocal publically. Thank you > >for seeing some value in my opinions. As long as you have the > >spirit to fight, fight on!! (I know you will.) > > > >Fran > >Member, Agnostics for Baha'i Free Speech, Midwest Chapter > > > > There isn't a whole lot here I disagree with you on, Fran. > Others need to hear opinions on the Bahai Faith that aren't > under the control of.... It would be nice to respond in public, throttled as it > is and has been by the voter abuse.... > > How about if I respond to this and the last message of yours > after removing all names and identifying allusions to your > husband, etc., "as a request for annonymity"? > > -- > Fred > > > --------------------------------------------------------- > Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com > --------------------------------------------------------- > I'll think about the above, but meanwhile, here's some e-mail that you are welcome respond to on the newsgroup: I sometimes think, "What is the nub of my discomfort with the Baha'i Faith?" I think it is the infallability issue. Perhaps it is my Jewish background or my philosophy training or just my love of art and literature as sources of truth, but I believe that it is harmful to our collective search for truth to elevate an individual person and his/her writing above all others (unless it's Hume or Kant or Martin Scorcese (-; ). Contrary to Baha'i theology, this paradigm is not necessary for a religion or for morality or for justice or for anything else. On the contrary, it is dangerous and ultimately oppressive, however sincere. I think this is a fundamental problem in the Baha'i Faith...the positing of infallibility. At best, it limits the intellectual life of the community by setting certain ideas beyond the realm of inquiry (but all ideologies do this); at worst, it can lead to an intolerant, self-righteous, parochial community without meaningful discourse or moral agency/choice. Many individual Baha'is certainly take the better path. So, I ask you: Do you think it is possible to believe in the infallibility of and have sufficient intellectual freedom? From - Sun Jun 01 09:55:21 1997 >From fran@schubert.crhc.uiuc.edu Sat May 31 16:31:25 1997 Received: (from fran@localhost) by schubert.crhc.uiuc.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id SAA11448; Sat, 31 May 1997 18:31:57 -0500 (CDT) Date: Sat, 31 May 1997 18:31:57 -0500 (CDT) From: Fran Baker Message-Id: <199705312331.SAA11448@schubert.crhc.uiuc.edu> To: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Fundamentalism Cc: fran@schubert.crhc.uiuc.edu X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 406 >So, I ask you: Do you think it is possible to believe in the infallibility >of and have sufficient intellectual freedom? And do you think the Baha'i Faith could survive a severe enough minimization of the nature and scope of the "infallibility" of its alledgedly divinely authorized persons, texts, and institutions to allow sufficient freedom, diversity of opinion, progress, etc.? From - Fri Aug 22 07:07:53 1997 >From bern@planeteer.com Fri Aug 22 00:36:54 1997 Received: from default (van2p6.planeteer.com [204.50.43.71]) by ns1.planeteer.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id AAA26079 for ; Fri, 22 Aug 1997 00:32:33 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199708220732.AAA26079@ns1.planeteer.com> Reply-To: <@planeteer.com> From: "bern" To: Subject: Fw: censorship moderators Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 00:38:57 -0700 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1157 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 2236 I thought you may be interested in the reply I just received from my posting today. What timing you would believe! Would you know why this posting which was also directed to soc.culture.iranian has yet to appear on that newsgroup? Also, where are issues of newsgroup moderation and control discussed on the usenet? This must be a hot topic. BTW my ISP does not receive alt.religion.bahai ---------- > From: S. Michele Smith > To: bern > Cc: Baha'i SRB Moderators > Subject: Re: censorship moderators > Date: Thursday, August 21, 1997 8:55 AM > > Dear bern, > > Thank you for your submission to soc.religion.bahai. > > I am returning it to you uposted as this thread has been discontinued as of > yesterday. > > Thank you for your participation. > > Sincerely, > S. Michele Smith > co-moderator > soc.religion.bahai > > ---------- > From: bern > To: soc-religion-bahai@ncren.net > Subject: Re: censorship moderators > Date: Thursday, August 21, 1997 3:14 AM > > There has been serious allegations made as to the impropriety of the voting > that resulted in the closing of soc.religion.bahai to free discussion, and > the subsequent institution of a moderator. Would the moderator care to > comment: > > 1.What is the nature of such allegations and what response is offered? > Has the votes of "157" individuals been discarded? > > 2.How is the moderator appointed, and when does his/her term expire? > > 3.Would the moderator agree to set up a newsgroup containing only the > deleted postings so that interested parties may have the opportunity to > follow the discussions in an uncensored format, scrutinize the actions and > decisions of the moderator, and form their own opinion of the moderated > format? May I suggest soc.religion.bahai.deleted? > > This posting may not have direct relevance to the stated topic of > soc.religion.bahai. However, as much as the moderator's reply will provide > answers to the above questions, it can also illuminate the position of the > Bahai faith to some real questions facing contemporary civil democratic > society. From - Fri Aug 22 10:12:39 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Fri Aug 22 05:18:25 1997 Received: (qmail 14284 invoked from network); 22 Aug 1997 12:18:23 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.118) by hm3.hotmail.com with SMTP; 22 Aug 1997 12:18:23 -0000 Message-ID: <33FD83F8.7EEF@hotmail.com> Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 08:20:08 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: bern@planeteer.com Subject: Re: Fw: censorship moderators References: <199708220732.AAA26079@ns1.planeteer.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 255 Thanks for forwarding your censored message to me. It's typical really of how srb operates.... -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Fri Jun 13 07:24:28 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Fri Jun 13 04:16:53 1997 Received: (qmail 12336 invoked from network); 13 Jun 1997 11:16:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.118) by hm3.hotmail.com with SMTP; 13 Jun 1997 11:16:52 -0000 Message-ID: <33A12C72.63BA@hotmail.com> Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 07:18:10 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: soc.religion.bahai CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: FWD From Andrea: Re: Bahai terrorism References: <"sb1KiB.A.KWF.NLSoz"@bounty> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 1913 SundayW@aol.com wrote: > > Out friend Andrea cannot access the newsgroup for some reason (though she > can > get mail, can't send it). So I am forwarding this on her behalf... > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > ----------------------------- > MESSAGE FOLLOWS > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > ----------------------------- > > Hi, > I don't know if anyone is interested, but I was interested in > reading alt.religion.bahai, so I tracked down some public news servers > (at least, I can access them, although I'm not entirely sure about > anyone else) that seem to carry alt.religion.bahai. If anyone is > interested, the ones I've found so far that seem to work are: > baracka.rz.uni-augsburg.de > news.idt.net <---the server I use > ftp.louisa.net > news.tln.lib.mi.us > rtcsrv5.realtech.de > Anyone who's interested, come check it out. So far, from what > I've read there is a lot of rather unfriendly discussion going on, but > there are some interesting postings. Because the group is so new, and > so few people have access, there isn't a whole lot of variety as far > as who posts, so please come and comment if you're interested. An > unmoderated newsgroup does no one any good if no one posts in it :). > (And while I'm sure there are those who argue it will do no one any > good anyway...well, let's just leave that alone) ;). > > -Andrea :) > aenglish@scnc.waverly.k12.mi.us Thanks Andrea, for your trouble of searching around to find these.... I'm sure they'll increase access for many people who have otherwise been denied it.... -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Fri Jun 13 07:24:26 1997 >From news@lana.zippo.com Fri Jun 13 04:16:51 1997 Received: (from news@localhost) by lana.zippo.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id EAA29860; Fri, 13 Jun 1997 04:16:45 -0700 (PDT) To: srb@bcca.org Path: newsp.zippo.com!news2 From: FG Newsgroups: soc.religion.bahai Subject: Re: FWD From Andrea: Re: Bahai terrorism Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 07:18:10 -0400 Organization: None Lines: 44 Message-ID: <33A12C72.63BA@hotmail.com> References: <"sb1KiB.A.KWF.NLSoz"@bounty> Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com NNTP-Posting-Host: glaysher@199.179.42.118 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) CC: FG@hotmail.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 1915 SundayW@aol.com wrote: > > Out friend Andrea cannot access the newsgroup for some reason (though she > can > get mail, can't send it). So I am forwarding this on her behalf... > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > ----------------------------- > MESSAGE FOLLOWS > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > ----------------------------- > > Hi, > I don't know if anyone is interested, but I was interested in > reading alt.religion.bahai, so I tracked down some public news servers > (at least, I can access them, although I'm not entirely sure about > anyone else) that seem to carry alt.religion.bahai. If anyone is > interested, the ones I've found so far that seem to work are: > baracka.rz.uni-augsburg.de > news.idt.net <---the server I use > ftp.louisa.net > news.tln.lib.mi.us > rtcsrv5.realtech.de > Anyone who's interested, come check it out. So far, from what > I've read there is a lot of rather unfriendly discussion going on, but > there are some interesting postings. Because the group is so new, and > so few people have access, there isn't a whole lot of variety as far > as who posts, so please come and comment if you're interested. An > unmoderated newsgroup does no one any good if no one posts in it :). > (And while I'm sure there are those who argue it will do no one any > good anyway...well, let's just leave that alone) ;). > > -Andrea :) > aenglish@scnc.waverly.k12.mi.us Thanks Andrea, for your trouble of searching around to find these.... I'm sure they'll increase access for many people who have otherwise been denied it.... -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Fri Jun 13 07:24:25 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Fri Jun 13 04:14:56 1997 Received: (qmail 12330 invoked from network); 13 Jun 1997 11:14:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.118) by hm3.hotmail.com with SMTP; 13 Jun 1997 11:14:54 -0000 Message-ID: <33A12C00.6701@hotmail.com> Date: Fri, 13 Jun 1997 07:16:16 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc Subject: news readers for alt.religion.bahai References: <"sb1KiB.A.KWF.NLSoz"@bounty> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 1914 SundayW@aol.com wrote: > > Out friend Andrea cannot access the newsgroup for some reason (though she > can > get mail, can't send it). So I am forwarding this on her behalf... > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > ----------------------------- > MESSAGE FOLLOWS > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > -- > ----------------------------- > > Hi, > I don't know if anyone is interested, but I was interested in > reading alt.religion.bahai, so I tracked down some public news servers > (at least, I can access them, although I'm not entirely sure about > anyone else) that seem to carry alt.religion.bahai. If anyone is > interested, the ones I've found so far that seem to work are: > baracka.rz.uni-augsburg.de > news.idt.net <---the server I use > ftp.louisa.net > news.tln.lib.mi.us > rtcsrv5.realtech.de > Anyone who's interested, come check it out. So far, from what > I've read there is a lot of rather unfriendly discussion going on, but > there are some interesting postings. Because the group is so new, and > so few people have access, there isn't a whole lot of variety as far > as who posts, so please come and comment if you're interested. An > unmoderated newsgroup does no one any good if no one posts in it :). > (And while I'm sure there are those who argue it will do no one any > good anyway...well, let's just leave that alone) ;). > > -Andrea :) > aenglish@scnc.waverly.k12.mi.us Thanks Andrea, for the trouble of searching around to find these.... I'm sure this ought to give access to some people who have otherwise been denied it.... -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Mon Aug 25 17:44:22 1997 >From hkt@wwa.com Mon Aug 25 10:29:36 1997 Received: from poolf2-036.wwa.com [207.241.63.101] by hirame.wwa.com with smtp (Smail3.1.29.WWA) id m0x32vG-000WRAC@hirame.wwa.com; Mon, 25 Aug 1997 12:28:17 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 12:27:26 -0500 (CDT) X-Sender: hkt@pop.wwa.com X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Light Version 1.5.2 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: "Frederick Glaysher" From: Henrietta Thomas Subject: Re: Fwd: draft X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 2156 At 04:46 AM 8/25/97 PDT, you wrote: > > >>From Fri Aug 22 07:51:14 1997 >>Received: (qmail 15481 invoked for bounce); 22 Aug 1997 14:51:13 -0000 >>Date: 22 Aug 1997 14:51:13 -0000 >>From: MAILER-DAEMON@hotmail.com >>To: FG@hotmail.com >>Subject: failure notice >> >>Hi. This is the qmail-send program at hotmail.com. >>I'm afraid I wasn't able to deliver your message to the following >>addresses. >>This is a permanent error; I've given up. Sorry it didn't work out. >> >>: >>Sorry, I couldn't find any host named wwa.com. (#5.1.2) >> >>--- Below this line is a copy of the message. >> >>Return-Path: >>Received: (qmail 15478 invoked from network); 22 Aug 1997 14:51:09 >-0000 >>Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.117) >> by hm3.hotmail.com with SMTP; 22 Aug 1997 14:51:09 -0000 >>Message-ID: <33FDA7C6.78B0@hotmail.com> >>Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 10:52:54 -0400 >>From: FG >>Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com >>X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) >>MIME-Version: 1.0 >>To: hkt@wwa.com >>CC: FG@hotmail.com >>Subject: [Fwd: Re: talk.religion.bahai] >>Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------10665BBA485D" >> >>This is a multi-part message in MIME format. >> >>--------------10665BBA485D >>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii >>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >> >>2nd try. My server can't find a wwa.com >>for some reason. [snip]..... I have no idea why your server couldn't find wwa.com. Hmmmm..... Anyway, I got your revised RFD, and it looks pretty good to me. Glad my suggestions were acceptable, and urge you to go ahead and send it in to group-advice. Thanks for explaining why you are sending a full RFD to the Iran and Israel newsgroups. I knew there had to be a reason, so I learned something from you. The important thing is for you to keep your cool and not get involved in a bunch of long drawn-out arguments over what happened last time. Most people would rather forget it anyway, and start off with a fresh new slate. Good luck, Henrietta From - Tue Aug 26 07:18:24 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Mon Aug 25 14:51:15 1997 Received: (qmail 9965 invoked from network); 25 Aug 1997 21:51:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.131) by hm2.hotmail.com with SMTP; 25 Aug 1997 21:51:11 -0000 Message-ID: <3401FEB1.51A5@hotmail.com> Date: Mon, 25 Aug 1997 17:52:49 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Henrietta Thomas CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re:draft alt.religion.bahai References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 1351 Henrietta Thomas wrote: > > I have no idea why your server couldn't find wwa.com. Hmmmm..... A bug in there somewhere.... > > Anyway, I got your revised RFD, and it looks pretty good to me. > Glad my suggestions were acceptable, and urge you to go ahead and > send it in to group-advice. I think I have to wait until late September, don't I? The RESULTS was post on March 27th. I think I have to wait until after that, though I haven't asked. Do you know? > > Thanks for explaining why you are sending a full RFD to the Iran > and Israel newsgroups. I knew there had to be a reason, so I learned > something from you. > > The important thing is for you to keep your cool and not get involved > in a bunch of long drawn-out arguments over what happened last time. > Most people would rather forget it anyway, and start off with a fresh > new slate. You're probably right.... I have the human impulse to want to still settle old scores. Surely best to forget it all if possible, or as much as possible.... I'm going to think long and hard on that strategy. I appreciate your mentioning it. > > Good luck, Thanks. I'll need it. > > Henrietta -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Tue Aug 12 13:48:14 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Tue Aug 12 04:43:42 1997 Received: (qmail 21123 invoked from network); 12 Aug 1997 11:43:38 -0000 Received: from ts?rh.metronet.lib.mi.us (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.20) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 12 Aug 1997 11:43:38 -0000 Message-ID: <33F04CD0.24F8@hotmail.com> Date: Tue, 12 Aug 1997 07:45:20 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Good vs. Evil References: <5son99$13m@mtinsc04.worldnet.att.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 1096 Laura Brennan wrote: > > Hi! I'm working on a research project, trying to find a common theme > between many different religions regarding the balance of good and evil. > Specifically, I am trying to discover which religions believe there must > be a certain number of good people on the earth, either to keep God from > destroying the earth or to keep the forces of evil in check. > > It's a little like looking for a needle in several voluminous haystacks. > If anyone has any thoughts (or, ideally, specific quotes) on the subject, > I would greatly appreciate it. Please post to this newsgroup, or feel > free to e-mail me directly at LauraBrennan@worldnet.att.net I suggest you meditate on the most truthful, insightful, and profound passage on evil in all of religious literature: "The heart of the sons of men is full of evil." Ecclesiastes, 9:3 > > Thank you all for your time. > > Best -- > > Laura -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Fri May 30 07:56:19 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Fri May 30 04:53:53 1997 Received: (qmail 25474 invoked from network); 30 May 1997 11:53:51 -0000 Received: from ts?rh.metronet.lib.mi.us (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.20) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 30 May 1997 11:53:51 -0000 Message-ID: <338EC01C.61F6@hotmail.com> Date: Fri, 30 May 1997 07:55:08 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc,soc.rights.human,soc.culture.israel,soc.culture.iranian CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Grief Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 1803 Nona C. Wright wrote: > > Frederick Glaysher wrote: > > > I could never walk away, you see.... It's to the bitter end for me.... > > Life is full of grief; I don't expect ever to be free of it. There > > are duties more important than the evasion of grief.... > > Ahh.. Fred, now this I can relate to. In all of my ups and downs as a > Baha'i, most because of my own character problems and struggles, and > some because of the immaturity and struggles of the Baha'i community to > become what it needs to become, I have never lost sight of the Big > Picture, which is that I believe deep in my heart and soul that > Baha'u'llah was who He said He was. We are both in for the long haul > where ever that leads us. I don't know the future.... I know only the past and the present.... A bleak record of human tragedy and woe, misery and exploitation.... I fear I have a very low opinion of the human being.... > > Fred you know I am not always comfortable with the way you choose to > express yourself, but have to agree with you that the pot definitly > needs to be stirred. And I do have faith that in the long run that we > will get to where we need to be. With a little pinch of spice.... But I'm not so hopeful.... In fact, I absolutely despair over the human condition.... > > Wish sometimes I could visit the future and see what history has to say > about this period of time. A low, dishonest, lying time, full of corruption, deceit, depravity, avarice, fornication, sodomy, and all the suppurating diseases of the human soul.... The human world, as usual.... And the Bahai Faith? No different really.... Intolerant fanatics, worse than many fundamentalists of other religions.... > > Nona -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Sun Jun 01 10:54:27 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Sun Jun 1 07:11:26 1997 Received: (qmail 4706 invoked from network); 1 Jun 1997 14:11:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.126) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 1 Jun 1997 14:11:24 -0000 Message-ID: <33918359.65B@hotmail.com> Date: Sun, 01 Jun 1997 10:12:41 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,misc.misc,talk.religion.misc,soc.culture.iranian,soc.culture.israel.soc.rights.huma n CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: New Web site: Bahai Faith References: <338EC01C.61F6@hotmail.com> <865125460.13432@dejanews.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 492 nokhodchi@hotmail.com wrote: > Check out this new web site on the Bahai faith : > > https://www.geocities.com/pentagon/3016/index.htm Wow! I love those blue clouds! Looks like an interesting new Web site.... I hope you'll allow all opinions to be voiced.... Not just attack and destroy.... Of course, people are always free to post here on alt.religion.bahai, in response, knowing no one is controlling the dialogue.... -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Thu Aug 28 07:02:59 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Thu Aug 28 03:43:37 1997 Received: (qmail 14480 invoked from network); 28 Aug 1997 10:43:35 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.118) by hm3.hotmail.com with SMTP; 28 Aug 1997 10:43:35 -0000 Message-ID: <340556C2.12B3@hotmail.com> Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 06:45:22 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,misc.misc,talk.religion.misc,soc.rights.human,wi.general,wi.madison.general,wi. madison CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Here is what I want to know... (regarding the whole Madison LSA thing.) References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 509 Jason Roberts wrote: > It seems to me that Baha'is are afraid to express their opinion (I am sure > Frederick Glaysher likes this option), or are not concerend with ethics, > or just don't want to comment until they think all the facts are in. I think you're confusing me with someone else.... Or I misunderstand you.... > Curious, > Jason -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Tue Sep 02 08:18:22 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Tue Sep 2 03:57:28 1997 Received: (qmail 11603 invoked from network); 2 Sep 1997 10:57:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.122) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 2 Sep 1997 10:57:06 -0000 Message-ID: <340BF163.5AA2@hotmail.com> Date: Tue, 02 Sep 1997 06:58:43 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: soc.religion.bahai CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Hypocrisy References: <5u9l22$8lr@itchy.serv.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 367 "Say: Honesty, virtue, wisdom and a saintly character redound to the exaltation of man, while dishonesty, imposture, ignorance and hypocrisy lead to his abasement." Baha'u'llah, Tablets of Baha'u'llah, 57. -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Tue Sep 02 08:18:21 1997 >From news@lacy.zippo.com Tue Sep 2 03:56:56 1997 Received: (from news@localhost) by lacy.zippo.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id DAA12877; Tue, 2 Sep 1997 03:56:53 -0700 (PDT) To: srb@bcca.org Path: newsp.zippo.com!news1 From: FG Newsgroups: soc.religion.bahai Subject: Hypocrisy Date: Tue, 02 Sep 1997 06:58:43 -0400 Organization: None Lines: 12 Message-ID: <340BF163.5AA2@hotmail.com> References: <5u9l22$8lr@itchy.serv.net> Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com NNTP-Posting-Host: glaysher@199.179.42.122 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) CC: FG@hotmail.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 367 "Say: Honesty, virtue, wisdom and a saintly character redound to the exaltation of man, while dishonesty, imposture, ignorance and hypocrisy lead to his abasement." Baha'u'llah, Tablets of Baha'u'llah, 57. -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Tue Sep 02 08:18:24 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Tue Sep 2 04:01:49 1997 Received: (qmail 26911 invoked from network); 2 Sep 1997 11:01:27 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.122) by hm3.hotmail.com with SMTP; 2 Sep 1997 11:01:27 -0000 Message-ID: <340BF269.1DB7@hotmail.com> Date: Tue, 02 Sep 1997 07:03:05 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Hypocrisy Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 392 POSTED TO SRB 9-1-97: "Say: Honesty, virtue, wisdom and a saintly character redound to the exaltation of man, while dishonesty, imposture, ignorance and hypocrisy lead to his abasement." Baha'u'llah, Tablets of Baha'u'llah, 57. -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Wed Sep 03 08:44:30 1997 >From boatright@topeka.cjnetworks.com Tue Sep 2 09:19:11 1997 Received: from rick.cjnetworks.com (Port67.cjnetworks.com [199.240.71.137]) by topeka.cjnetworks.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id LAA21665; Tue, 2 Sep 1997 11:17:21 -0500 (CDT) Message-Id: <199709021617.LAA21665@topeka.cjnetworks.com> Comments: Authenticated sender is From: "Rick Boatright" Organization: Topeka Business Computers To: Frederick Glaysher Date: Tue, 2 Sep 1997 11:20:22 -0600 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: Hypocrisy Reply-to: boatright@cjnetworks.com CC: srb-mods@bcca.org Priority: normal In-reply-to: <340BF163.5AA2@hotmail.com> X-mailer: Pegasus Mail for Win32 (v2.50) X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 711 Frederick, this was posted, and we'll continue to post them, of course, since it would be indeed hypocritical of us to not post your quotations which you appear to be posting solely so that you can include the advertisement for ARB in your signature. Rick Boatright co-moderator soc.religion.bahai > "Say: Honesty, virtue, wisdom and a saintly character > redound to the exaltation of man, while dishonesty, > imposture, ignorance and hypocrisy lead to his > abasement." > > Baha'u'llah, Tablets of Baha'u'llah, 57. > > -- > Frederick Glaysher > UseNet: alt.religion.bahai > Ask your ISP to add it; also available on > www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. > From - Mon Aug 18 10:19:39 1997 >From news@lana.pathlink.com Mon Aug 18 07:13:46 1997 Received: (from news@localhost) by lana.pathlink.com (8.8.6/8.8.5) id HAA09760; Mon, 18 Aug 1997 07:13:44 -0700 (PDT) To: srb@bcca.org Path: newsp.zippo.com!news2 From: FG Newsgroups: soc.religion.bahai Subject: Re: Inactive belivers. (Not CB's) Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 10:15:27 -0400 Organization: None Lines: 46 Message-ID: <33F858FF.4993@hotmail.com> References: <"GkV50.A.20C.hwl9z"@bounty> Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com NNTP-Posting-Host: glaysher@199.179.42.121 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) CC: FG@hotmail.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 1699 RMckin6046 wrote: > > To s.r.b. with cc to provi@snet.net > > Providencia wrote a post dealing with his status as an inactive > Baha'i. It seems some Baha'is had questioned him on whether he was a > covenant breaker because of his inactive status. [clip] > A covenant breaker is NOT: [clip] > ...One who is a Baha'i, who has not withdrawn from the Faith > administratively and/or who still believes in Baha'u'llah, but for > whatever reason is not active with day-to-day affairs. Whether this > person keeps the Baha'i laws or calls himself Baha'i or not is > immaterial to his status. He is a Baha'i. He is obviously inactive > and may choose to call himself an "inactive Baha'i" but it is not up > to other Baha'is to label him anything but "Baha'i". [There are any > number of reasons why someone may be inactive. In our community is a > woman who must remain inactive for the peace of her family, and there > are passages from the Guardian that back up her choice.] It seems to me that this neglects that many "inactive" Bahais choose to have nothing or little to do with the Bahai Faith for very good reasons at times.... Perhaps Providencia was one of these people.... The rigidity and intolerance of Bahai communities, operating often along very fundamentalist lines, have driven THOUSANDS of Bahais away.... into so-called "inactivity." [clip] > Richard > -------------------------------- > Dr Richard A McKinley > Fayetteville NC USA > RMckin6046@aol.com & RMCK-BEAR@juno.com -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Mon Aug 18 10:19:41 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Mon Aug 18 07:13:48 1997 Received: (qmail 16657 invoked from network); 18 Aug 1997 14:13:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.121) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 18 Aug 1997 14:13:47 -0000 Message-ID: <33F858FF.4993@hotmail.com> Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 10:15:27 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: soc.religion.bahai CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Inactive belivers. (Not CB's) References: <"GkV50.A.20C.hwl9z"@bounty> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 1699 RMckin6046 wrote: > > To s.r.b. with cc to provi@snet.net > > Providencia wrote a post dealing with his status as an inactive > Baha'i. It seems some Baha'is had questioned him on whether he was a > covenant breaker because of his inactive status. [clip] > A covenant breaker is NOT: [clip] > ...One who is a Baha'i, who has not withdrawn from the Faith > administratively and/or who still believes in Baha'u'llah, but for > whatever reason is not active with day-to-day affairs. Whether this > person keeps the Baha'i laws or calls himself Baha'i or not is > immaterial to his status. He is a Baha'i. He is obviously inactive > and may choose to call himself an "inactive Baha'i" but it is not up > to other Baha'is to label him anything but "Baha'i". [There are any > number of reasons why someone may be inactive. In our community is a > woman who must remain inactive for the peace of her family, and there > are passages from the Guardian that back up her choice.] It seems to me that this neglects that many "inactive" Bahais choose to have nothing or little to do with the Bahai Faith for very good reasons at times.... Perhaps Providencia was one of these people.... The rigidity and intolerance of Bahai communities, operating often along very fundamentalist lines, have driven THOUSANDS of Bahais away.... into so-called "inactivity." [clip] > Richard > -------------------------------- > Dr Richard A McKinley > Fayetteville NC USA > RMckin6046@aol.com & RMCK-BEAR@juno.com -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Wed Aug 20 07:56:07 1997 >From blimber@capaccess.org Tue Aug 19 19:38:19 1997 Received: (from blimber@localhost) by cap1.CapAccess.org (8.6.12/8.6.10) id WAA20682; Tue, 19 Aug 1997 22:43:55 -0400 Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 22:43:54 -0400 (EDT) From: Bruce Limber To: Frederick Glaysher Subject: Re: Inactive belivers. (Not CB's) In-Reply-To: <"YhdjfC.A._NE.lhd-z"@bounty> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 578 > It seems to me that this neglects that many "inactive" Bahais > choose to have nothing or little to do with the Bahai Faith > for very good reasons at times.... Perhaps Providencia was one > of these people.... The rigidity and intolerance of Bahai > communities, operating often along very fundamentalist lines, > have driven THOUSANDS of Bahais away.... into so-called > "inactivity." You know, once--just once--, I'd like to see you have something _positive_ to say about the Faith. Your nonstop negativism is neither helpful nor constructive. Thank you. From - Sun Jun 01 11:25:19 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Sun Jun 1 08:25:10 1997 Received: (qmail 5369 invoked from network); 1 Jun 1997 15:22:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.126) by hm2.hotmail.com with SMTP; 1 Jun 1997 15:22:48 -0000 Message-ID: <33919416.333D@hotmail.com> Date: Sun, 01 Jun 1997 11:24:06 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc,soc.rights.human,soc.culture.iranian,soc.culture.israel CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Infallibility #2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 1504 SOMEONE wrote: > >So, I ask you: Do you think it is possible to believe in the infallibility > >of and have sufficient intellectual freedom? > > And do you think the Baha'i Faith could survive a severe enough > minimization of the nature and scope of the "infallibility" > of its alledgedly divinely authorized persons, texts, and institutions > to allow sufficient freedom, diversity of opinion, progress, etc.? This seems to be its struggle.... "Minimization"? I'm not sure that's the right word.... or necessary, you see.... Let's call it the proper nature and proper scope of its infallibility. Or use another word, humility on the part of the individuals on the Universal House of Justice and the capacity to restrain their natural human impluses to use power to CRUSH others.... It seems to me there is a proper role for religious authority.... One of which is to protect believers from the fanatics in the fold.... It hasn't yet reached a stage of development where it allows "sufficient freedom, diversity of opinion, progress, etc." in my opinion.... I'm not sure it ever will. I distrust attempts to predict the future. I know with certainty only the past, given the usual qualifications even there.... I can only hope and wait and see what historically actually happens.... For instance, I'm still waiting for a response from the Universal House of Justice to my Open Letter of late March.... -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Sun Jun 01 11:25:16 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Sun Jun 1 08:07:05 1997 Received: (qmail 5335 invoked from network); 1 Jun 1997 15:07:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.126) by hm2.hotmail.com with SMTP; 1 Jun 1997 15:07:02 -0000 Message-ID: <33919063.13F@hotmail.com> Date: Sun, 01 Jun 1997 11:08:19 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc,soc.culture.iranian,soc.culture.israel,soc.rights.human CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Infallibility? Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 2380 SOMEONE wrote: > ...but meanwhile, > here's some e-mail that you are welcome respond to on the newsgroup: > > I sometimes think, "What is the nub of my discomfort with the Baha'i Faith?" > I think it is the infallability issue. Perhaps it is my Jewish background > or my philosophy training or just my love of art and literature as sources > of truth, but I believe that it is harmful to our collective search for > truth to elevate an individual person and his/her writing above all others > (unless it's Hume or Kant or Martin Scorcese (-; ). > Contrary to Baha'i theology, this paradigm is not necessary for a > religion or for morality or for justice or for anything else. On the > contrary, it is dangerous and ultimately oppressive, however sincere. > I think this is a fundamental problem in the Baha'i Faith...the > positing of infallibility. At best, it limits the intellectual > life of the community by setting certain ideas beyond the realm of > inquiry (but all ideologies do this); at worst, it can lead to an intolerant, > self-righteous, parochial community without meaningful discourse or > moral agency/choice. Many individual Baha'is certainly take the better path. You describe the Bahai Faith quite well here, especially in the last three or four lines.... I'm a former Catholic.... Claims of infallibility don't bother me, unless the general atmosphere is one of ruthless coercion and oppression.... I respect the Pope, even today, and believe he has, unlike the Universal House of Justice, done much good for people and cultures throughout the world.... His many trips around the globe have been beneficent and worthy, I believe, of the highest praise.... To me, his only shortcomings are that he believes only in Jesus Christ and Catholicism.... Some Bahais take the better path, unsupported by the fanatics in the Bahai Administration, apparently, who imagine someday they will be able to get them to think like Iranians too.... > So, I ask you: Do you think it is possible to believe in the infallibility > of and have sufficient intellectual freedom? Catholicism is the best historical antecedent and leads me to say, unequivocally, yes.... The historical Bahai Faith, at this point, evokes in me very dubious feelings indeed.... -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Wed Jun 04 07:59:21 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Wed Jun 4 04:33:57 1997 Received: (qmail 28817 invoked from network); 4 Jun 1997 11:33:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.118) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 4 Jun 1997 11:33:55 -0000 Message-ID: <339552F2.73A7@hotmail.com> Date: Wed, 04 Jun 1997 07:35:14 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Infallibility? References: <33919063.13F@hotmail.com> <33952bc9.102798547@news.wwnet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 1674 Roger Reini wrote: > > Followups trimmed -- RR > > On Sun, 01 Jun 1997 11:08:19 -0400, Frederick Glaysher > wrote: > > > > >You describe the Bahai Faith quite well here, especially in the last > >three > >or four lines.... I'm a former Catholic.... Claims of infallibility > >don't > >bother me, unless the general atmosphere is one of ruthless coercion and > >oppression.... I respect the Pope, even today, and believe he has, > >unlike > >the Universal House of Justice, done much good for people and cultures > >throughout the world.... His many trips around the globe have been > >beneficent and worthy, I believe, of the highest praise.... To me, his > >only shortcomings are that he believes only in Jesus Christ and > >Catholicism.... > > Yes, I too respect the Pope. I've never been Catholic, but I've > respected and admired him throughout his papacy. His trips are > certainly worthy of praise. And I feel that he is imbued with a good > sense of the spirit of the age, even if he hasn't recognized > Baha'u'llah. > > Your remark about the Universal House of Justice was gratuitous and > uncalled for, IMHO. I've had the privilege of attending two talks by > members of the House, and I've found both of them to be inspiring. > Granted, these talks have not been the public spectacles that the > Pope's visit have been, but that does not diminish their worth. Up not trying to one up you, Roger, but I've attended at least three or four talks by members of the House too.... > > Roger (rreini@wwnet.com) > https://www.wwnet.com/~rreini/ -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Mon Sep 08 08:08:37 1997 >From forumbahai@es.co.nz Sun Sep 7 20:09:50 1997 Received: from p24-dn.es.co.nz (p24-dn.es.co.nz [209.76.100.24]) by Zeus.es.co.nz (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id PAA16011 for ; Mon, 8 Sep 1997 15:09:38 +1200 Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 15:09:38 +1200 Message-Id: <2.2.16.19970908150822.4d5765ce@es.co.nz> X-Sender: forumbahai@es.co.nz X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 2.2 (16) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: Frederick Glaysher From: Alison and Steve Marshall Subject: Internet article in Baha'i newsletter mentions you X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 6480 Hi Frederick, It seems you're famous, even in New Zealand. Here's what the New Zealand Baha'i News had to say about you: "In recent weeks, a controversy has blown up concerning soc.religion.bahai An individual Baha'i has accused its moderators of "censorship", claiming that they will not allow his point of view to be posted there. The moderators say his postings were rejected on the basis of tone, that the individual wanted to post open insults and sarcasm. When the moderators asked the complainant to re-phrase his postings he refused, and instead embarked on a campaign to create a new 'unmoderated' newsgroup. The campaign is still in progress." This is what I wrote to my national assembly about the matter: -----begins-------- Dear friends, My main reason for writing is to commend you on your excellent feast letter articles concerning the Four Year Plan. However, I do also have a few concerns about a recent article in the New Zealand Baha'i News. Feast letter ------------ The recent feast letter article, "The process of community building" (20 August 1997), is a particular favourite of mine. It resulted in some ground-breaking consultation at the Dunedin feast. The feast letter and the New Zealand Baha'i News are doing a great job of keeping me really well informed about national and local concerns and successes, as well as offering thought-provoking articles. Amongst the wonderful material, inevitably, there are going to be a few "problem" pieces, and I feel the need to alert you to the following item... Concerns about newsletter article --------------------------------- The newsletter article I am concerned about is "Baha'is on the Internet--a traveller's advisory". My general concern is that the article tends to highlight the negative aspects of the Internet. this isn't surprising considering the topic chosen, and I'd like to suggest including an article focusing on the uses Baha'is have made of the Internet. I would be happy to write such an article. My particular concerns are that the article is inaccurate in parts, and out of step with the trends of the Four Year Plan: o The article states, "It is advisable that any individual Baha'is setting up their own Web pages that refer to the Faith or its teachings should clear the intended Baha'i-related content with their Assembly first." My understanding is that Baha'i review specifically does not apply to web-sites. o The article goes on to say, "Also, it makes little sense to "re-create the wheel" by including on a personal Web page large amounts of information, in your own words, about your beliefs, as some individual Baha'is have done. There are many good, well-prepared official sites available to which readers can be directed by "hyperlinks" included in a personal Web page." I believe this statements contradicts your vision of a Baha'i community moving beyond stage one behaviour with its "expectations of conformity" and "a widely accepted view of what the Baha'i Faith is all about." o The article focuses only on moderated, Baha'i-only, Baha'i-related "email lists" run by the BCCA. In reality there are many additional Baha'i-related lists that are unmoderated, open, and/or non-BCCA. o The article comments on a recent issue on Usenet: "In recent weeks, a controversy has blown up concerning soc.religion.bahai An individual Baha'i has accused its moderators of "censorship", claiming that they will not allow his point of view to be posted there. The moderators say his postings were rejected on the basis of tone, that the individual wanted to post open insults and sarcasm. When the moderators asked the complainant to re-phrase his postings he refused, and instead embarked on a campaign to create a new 'unmoderated' newsgroup. The campaign is still in progress." I have several concerns: 1. The "individual Baha'i"/"complainant" is easily identifiable. One just has to look through the soc.religion.bahai archives, available on the web. I don't think it's appropriate to criticise this person (Frederick Glaysher, ), particularly since he has not, to my knowledge, been contacted by any Baha'i administrative body and told of concerns about his behaviour. It amounts to trial-by-media, and I find it very distasteful. The newsletter article, in mentioning the situation, spreads what amounts to gossip. Given that the writer of the article is against the airing of personal views and advocates the promulgation of official views, there is some irony in the inclusion of this incident. 2. The description of the controversy is one-sided. I believe more damage was done, at the time, by individual Baha'is lobbying others to vote against the formation of a new unmoderated Baha'i-related newsgroup, in violation of the Usenet rules for voting that specifically ban lobbying and block-voting. Not that I'm suggesting more information be printed in the newsletter about the incident! ka kite ano, Steve ------ends----------- ...And here's the national office's reply: >Return-Path: >From: "Baha'i Secretariat NZ" >To: "'Alison and Steve Marshall'" >Subject: RE: Feast letters / Internet article >Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 11:39:40 +-1200 >Encoding: 123 TEXT > >Dear Steve, > >Thank you for your feedback on the Feast letters and newsletter articles. > It is always good to hear from the friends about the way in which the >information we disseminate is received and perceived. Your comments >regarding the article on the use of the internet have been noted. We will >certainly keep you in mind for another article on the uses of the internet. > At present there is rather a backlog of material waiting to go into the >Newsletter. > >Thanks again for sharing your concerns. > >Warmest Baha'i love, >Suzanne Mahon > >---------- "Noted" is generally code for "we're not going to do anything about it". Feel free to complain personally, but please don't quote me on that! ka kite ano, (see you later) Steve -------------------------------------------------------------------------- Alison & Steve Marshall, Aotearoa | "Fanaticism consists in redoubling forumbahai@es.co.nz (New Zealand) | your efforts when you have forgotten Try: https://www.rightwords.co.nz/ | your aim." - George Santayana From - Fri Jul 25 07:05:15 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Fri Jul 25 04:01:58 1997 Received: (qmail 8261 invoked from network); 25 Jul 1997 11:01:56 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.118) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 25 Jul 1997 11:01:56 -0000 Message-ID: <33D887FE.939@hotmail.com> Date: Fri, 25 Jul 1997 07:03:26 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc,soc.culture.iranian,soc.culture.israel,soc.rights.human,alt.religi on.islam CC: FG@hotmail.com, talisman@umich.edu Subject: Islam & Bahai Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 5221 Recent discussion on alt.religion.bahai brings to mind the Egyptian Nobel laureate Naguib Mahfouz's 1983 The Journey of Ibn Fattouma, the story of Qindil Ibn Fattouma's travels through several countries in search of the land of Gebel or perfection, a sweeping vista and modern literary pilgrimage of the soul.... As a boy he asks his devout Sheikh one day, "If Islam is as you say it is, why are the streets packed with poor and ignorant people?" "Islam today," he answered me sorrowfully, "skulks in the mosques and doesn't go beyond them to the outside world." Believing "in the intellect and in freedom of choice," the Sheikh unknowingly fills him with a burning desire to seek out other lands in order to learn how to reform the land of Islam. As young manhood arrives he sets off to the land of Mashriq, a primitive land where people live in a state of nature, naked and worshipping the moon, "merging into universal lovemaking." In the land of Haira the king is worshipped and all dissenting voices are ruthlessly suppressed. Around the king's palace are human heads afixed to the top of poles: I went off, certain that they were martyrs to justice and liberty, deducing this from what usually occurs in the land of divine Revelation. This is a strange world replete with madness. . . . This critical voice is the voice of Mahfouz himself. Ibn Fattouma is eventually thrown, unjustly, for twenty years, into prison, where he converses with other prisoners who had "questioned critically some of the anomalous actions pertaining to justice and human freedom." Noticing everywhere similar evils in his homeland, he begins to worry that the land of perfection does not exist in this world and is suddenly just as arbitrarily released. The next land is Halba, the land of freedom, where "god is reason" and the poor are "several degrees better off than the poor of Haira and Mashriq." Despite murders and raucous demonstrations, Ibn Fattouma describes it as a land of plenty, free of despotism, and where "All religions are to be found," including "atheists and pagans." At one point Ibn Fattouma remarks, "The life of every people is generally revealed through some basic idea," reminding me of the historian Ibn Khaldun's emphasis on "group feeling." After Ibn Fattouma criticizes Halba as a land of irreligion and "anarchy," lacking "some moral basis," an assimilated Halba imam tells him, Your homeland is the land of Islam, and what do you find there? A tyrannical ruler who rules to please himself, so where is the moral basis? Men of religion who bring religion into subjection to serve the ruler, so where is the moral basis? Mahfouz has the rare penetrating intellect and courage to confront issues of central importance to Islam in the twentieth century, whether in Egypt, the Middle East, or India. The land of Aman is one of "total justice" and "armed guards" spying on everyone, robbing people "of all spirit of adventure and freedom," while the state "owns everything." He is told "proudly, 'Our land is the only one in which you will not come across illusions and superstitions.'" Shortly, calvary parade by, their lances tipped with human heads. Quickly traveling on, the land of Ghuroub, patently India, proves "a paradise of people in a trance." In the forests men and women, recluses devoted to "communal singing," prepare "themselves for the journey to the land of Gebel," perfection at last. Finally ascending a mountain to Gebel, Ibn Fattouma writes "a journal of my travels," the book itself, as it were, sending it back to the land of Islam hoping it will do some good. Mahfouz has sent many messages. In January of 1994 he wrote a public statement, which he and dozens of prominent Egyptian writers and artists signed and which is just as applicable to Islam elsewhere, titled "Against Cultural Terrorism": "All of Egypt is desperately searching for the freedom of thought. . . . As a result of religion, we are suffering." Mahfouz, in October 1994, at the age of eighty-three, was stabbed in the neck by an Islamic fanatic, aided by over twenty accomplices, nearly killing him and severing a nerve impairing his control of his writing hand. Many writers and innocent people in India, Hindu and Muslim, have met with the same kind of violence or oppression, not the least of whom is Salman Rushdie. It seems to me that the Bahai Faith is heading (no pun intended) down the same road of oppression and fanaticism as Islam, a religion Mahfouz and Rushdie have rightly reveal to be bankrupt, corrupt, atrophied, beyond restoration in any way whatsoever.... lacking all moral basis.... self-discredited.... by its own ayatollahs.... To cavil that HE said this or that, in the Quran or anywhere else, is ludicrous in the extreme.... -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Fri Aug 01 08:32:29 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Tue Jul 29 05:35:13 1997 Received: (qmail 21820 invoked from network); 29 Jul 1997 12:35:11 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.119) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 29 Jul 1997 12:35:11 -0000 Message-ID: <33DDE3E0.7418@hotmail.com> Date: Tue, 29 Jul 1997 08:36:48 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc,soc.culture.iranian,soc.culture.israel,soc.rights.human,alt.religi on.islam CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Islam & Bahai References: <33D887FE.939@hotmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 5920 Nafeh Fananapazir wrote: > > -- > > Dear Frederick Glaysher, > > Allah'u'Abha... > > I really admire the works of Naguib Mahfouz: particularly, "The > Journey of Ibn Fattouma" "The Children of Gebelaawi" and > "Thousand and One Nights" I haven't read "Thousand and One Nights" yet.... Hope to though.... > > Excellent posting. > > Baha'i love, > > nafeh fananapazir Frederick Glaysher wrote: > > Recent discussion on alt.religion.bahai brings to mind the > Egyptian Nobel laureate Naguib Mahfouz's 1983 The Journey > of Ibn Fattouma, the story of Qindil Ibn Fattouma's travels > through several countries in search of the land of Gebel or > perfection, a sweeping vista and modern literary pilgrimage > of the soul.... As a boy he asks his devout Sheikh one day, > > "If Islam is as you say it is, why are the streets > packed with poor and ignorant people?" > "Islam today," he answered me sorrowfully, "skulks > in the mosques and doesn't go beyond them to the > outside world." > > Believing "in the intellect and in freedom of choice," the > Sheikh unknowingly fills him with a burning desire to seek > out other lands in order to learn how to reform the land of > Islam. As young manhood arrives he sets off to the land of > Mashriq, a primitive land where people live in a state of > nature, naked and worshipping the moon, "merging into universal > lovemaking." In the land of Haira the king is worshipped and > all dissenting voices are ruthlessly suppressed. Around the > king's palace are human heads afixed to the top of poles: > > I went off, certain that they were martyrs to justice > and liberty, deducing this from what usually occurs in > the land of divine Revelation. This is a strange > world replete with madness. . . . > > This critical voice is the voice of Mahfouz himself. Ibn > Fattouma is eventually thrown, unjustly, for twenty years, into > prison, where he converses with other prisoners who had "questioned > critically some of the anomalous actions pertaining to justice and > human freedom." Noticing everywhere similar evils in his homeland, > he begins to worry that the land of perfection does not exist in > this world and is suddenly just as arbitrarily released. > The next land is Halba, the land of freedom, where "god is > reason" and the poor are "several degrees better off than the poor > of Haira and Mashriq." Despite murders and raucous demonstrations, > Ibn Fattouma describes it as a land of plenty, free of despotism, > and where "All religions are to be found," including "atheists and > pagans." At one point Ibn Fattouma remarks, "The life of every > people is generally revealed through some basic idea," reminding > me of the historian Ibn Khaldun's emphasis on "group feeling." > After Ibn Fattouma criticizes Halba as a land of irreligion and > "anarchy," lacking "some moral basis," an assimilated Halba imam > tells him, > > Your homeland is the land of Islam, and what do you > find there? A tyrannical ruler who rules to please > himself, so where is the moral basis? Men of religion > who bring religion into subjection to serve the ruler, > so where is the moral basis? > > Mahfouz has the rare penetrating intellect and courage to confront > issues of central importance to Islam in the twentieth century, > whether in Egypt, the Middle East, or India. > The land of Aman is one of "total justice" and "armed guards" > spying on everyone, robbing people "of all spirit of adventure and > freedom," while the state "owns everything." He is told "proudly, > 'Our land is the only one in which you will not come across > illusions and superstitions.'" Shortly, calvary parade by, their > lances tipped with human heads. Quickly traveling on, the land > of Ghuroub, patently India, proves "a paradise of people in a > trance." In the forests men and women, recluses devoted to > "communal singing," prepare "themselves for the journey to the > land of Gebel," perfection at last. Finally ascending a mountain > to Gebel, Ibn Fattouma writes "a journal of my travels," the book > itself, as it were, sending it back to the land of Islam hoping > it will do some good. Mahfouz has sent many messages. In > January of 1994 he wrote a public statement, which he and dozens > of prominent Egyptian writers and artists signed and which is > just as applicable to Islam elsewhere, titled "Against Cultural > Terrorism": "All of Egypt is desperately searching for the > freedom of thought. . . . As a result of religion, we are > suffering." Mahfouz, in October 1994, at the age of eighty-three, > was stabbed in the neck by an Islamic fanatic, aided by over > twenty accomplices, nearly killing him and severing a nerve > impairing his control of his writing hand. Many writers and > innocent people in India, Hindu and Muslim, have met with the > same kind of violence or oppression, not the least of whom > is Salman Rushdie. > > It seems to me that the Bahai Faith is heading (no pun intended) > down the same road of oppression and fanaticism as Islam, a > religion Mahfouz and Rushdie have rightly reveal to be bankrupt, > corrupt, atrophied, beyond restoration in any way whatsoever.... > lacking all moral basis.... self-discredited.... by its own > ayatollahs.... > > To cavil that HE said this or that, in the Quran or anywhere > else, is ludicrous in the extreme.... > > -- > Frederick Glaysher > UseNet: alt.religion.bahai > Ask your ISP to add it; also available on > www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Fri Aug 01 08:32:32 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Tue Jul 29 05:41:27 1997 Received: (qmail 21840 invoked from network); 29 Jul 1997 12:41:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.119) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 29 Jul 1997 12:41:25 -0000 Message-ID: <33DDE555.638C@hotmail.com> Date: Tue, 29 Jul 1997 08:43:01 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc,soc.culture.iranian,soc.culture.israel,soc.rights.human,alt.religi on.islam CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Islam & Bahai References: <33D887FE.939@hotmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 6273 Nafeh Fananapazir wrote: > > -- > I do however, have more optimism about the future of the Baha'i > Faith than you do: the Faith is still growing; Islam is falling > apart. You're right about Islam falling apart, though ignorant Islamic fanatics are too dull to perceive and understand writers as subtle and profound as Mahfouz or Rushdie.... What do you base your "optimism" on? The Bahai Faith's apparent acceptance of Islam's intolerance and suppression of the human conscience.... of writers like Mahfouz or Rushdie? I have no such "optimism" about the future of the Bahai Faith.... Less so every day.... What EVIDENCE could I or any half way intelligent mind base it on? > > Allah'u'Abha > > Nafeh Fananapazir Frederick Glaysher wrote: > > Recent discussion on alt.religion.bahai brings to mind the > Egyptian Nobel laureate Naguib Mahfouz's 1983 The Journey > of Ibn Fattouma, the story of Qindil Ibn Fattouma's travels > through several countries in search of the land of Gebel or > perfection, a sweeping vista and modern literary pilgrimage > of the soul.... As a boy he asks his devout Sheikh one day, > > "If Islam is as you say it is, why are the streets > packed with poor and ignorant people?" > "Islam today," he answered me sorrowfully, "skulks > in the mosques and doesn't go beyond them to the > outside world." > > Believing "in the intellect and in freedom of choice," the > Sheikh unknowingly fills him with a burning desire to seek > out other lands in order to learn how to reform the land of > Islam. As young manhood arrives he sets off to the land of > Mashriq, a primitive land where people live in a state of > nature, naked and worshipping the moon, "merging into universal > lovemaking." In the land of Haira the king is worshipped and > all dissenting voices are ruthlessly suppressed. Around the > king's palace are human heads afixed to the top of poles: > > I went off, certain that they were martyrs to justice > and liberty, deducing this from what usually occurs in > the land of divine Revelation. This is a strange > world replete with madness. . . . > > This critical voice is the voice of Mahfouz himself. Ibn > Fattouma is eventually thrown, unjustly, for twenty years, into > prison, where he converses with other prisoners who had "questioned > critically some of the anomalous actions pertaining to justice and > human freedom." Noticing everywhere similar evils in his homeland, > he begins to worry that the land of perfection does not exist in > this world and is suddenly just as arbitrarily released. > The next land is Halba, the land of freedom, where "god is > reason" and the poor are "several degrees better off than the poor > of Haira and Mashriq." Despite murders and raucous demonstrations, > Ibn Fattouma describes it as a land of plenty, free of despotism, > and where "All religions are to be found," including "atheists and > pagans." At one point Ibn Fattouma remarks, "The life of every > people is generally revealed through some basic idea," reminding > me of the historian Ibn Khaldun's emphasis on "group feeling." > After Ibn Fattouma criticizes Halba as a land of irreligion and > "anarchy," lacking "some moral basis," an assimilated Halba imam > tells him, > > Your homeland is the land of Islam, and what do you > find there? A tyrannical ruler who rules to please > himself, so where is the moral basis? Men of religion > who bring religion into subjection to serve the ruler, > so where is the moral basis? > > Mahfouz has the rare penetrating intellect and courage to confront > issues of central importance to Islam in the twentieth century, > whether in Egypt, the Middle East, or India. > The land of Aman is one of "total justice" and "armed guards" > spying on everyone, robbing people "of all spirit of adventure and > freedom," while the state "owns everything." He is told "proudly, > 'Our land is the only one in which you will not come across > illusions and superstitions.'" Shortly, calvary parade by, their > lances tipped with human heads. Quickly traveling on, the land > of Ghuroub, patently India, proves "a paradise of people in a > trance." In the forests men and women, recluses devoted to > "communal singing," prepare "themselves for the journey to the > land of Gebel," perfection at last. Finally ascending a mountain > to Gebel, Ibn Fattouma writes "a journal of my travels," the book > itself, as it were, sending it back to the land of Islam hoping > it will do some good. Mahfouz has sent many messages. In > January of 1994 he wrote a public statement, which he and dozens > of prominent Egyptian writers and artists signed and which is > just as applicable to Islam elsewhere, titled "Against Cultural > Terrorism": "All of Egypt is desperately searching for the > freedom of thought. . . . As a result of religion, we are > suffering." Mahfouz, in October 1994, at the age of eighty-three, > was stabbed in the neck by an Islamic fanatic, aided by over > twenty accomplices, nearly killing him and severing a nerve > impairing his control of his writing hand. Many writers and > innocent people in India, Hindu and Muslim, have met with the > same kind of violence or oppression, not the least of whom > is Salman Rushdie. > > It seems to me that the Bahai Faith is heading (no pun intended) > down the same road of oppression and fanaticism as Islam, a > religion Mahfouz and Rushdie have rightly reveal to be bankrupt, > corrupt, atrophied, beyond restoration in any way whatsoever.... > lacking all moral basis.... self-discredited.... by its own > ayatollahs.... > > To cavil that HE said this or that, in the Quran or anywhere > else, is ludicrous in the extreme.... > > -- > Frederick Glaysher > UseNet: alt.religion.bahai > Ask your ISP to add it; also available on > www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Tue Jul 29 08:33:41 1997 >From nf6y@faraday.clas.virginia.edu Fri Jul 25 14:37:23 1997 Received: from faraday.clas.virginia.edu by mail.virginia.edu id aa00271; 25 Jul 97 17:37 EDT Received: (from nf6y@localhost) by faraday.clas.Virginia.EDU (8.8.5/8.6.6) id RAA202582 for FG@hotmail.com; Fri, 25 Jul 1997 17:37:20 -0400 Date: Fri, 25 Jul 1997 17:37:20 -0400 From: Nafeh Fananapazir Message-Id: <199707252137.RAA202582@faraday.clas.Virginia.EDU> To: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Islam & Bahai Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc,soc.culture.iranian,soc.culture.israel,soc.rights.human,alt.religi on.islam Organization: uva X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 181 -- I do however, have more optimism about the future of the Baha'i Faith than you do: the Faith is still growing; Islam is falling apart. Allah'u'Abha Nafeh Fananapazir From - Tue Jul 29 08:33:42 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Sun Jul 27 06:03:32 1997 Received: (qmail 11658 invoked from network); 27 Jul 1997 13:03:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.121) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 27 Jul 1997 13:03:30 -0000 Message-ID: <33DB477C.5ACE@hotmail.com> Date: Sun, 27 Jul 1997 09:05:00 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: soc.religion.bahai CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Islam & Bahai Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 5223 Recent discussion on alt.religion.bahai brings to mind the Egyptian Nobel laureate Naguib Mahfouz's 1983 The Journey of Ibn Fattouma, the story of Qindil Ibn Fattouma's travels through several countries in search of the land of Gebel or perfection, a sweeping vista and modern literary pilgrimage of the soul.... As a boy he asks his devout Sheikh one day, "If Islam is as you say it is, why are the streets packed with poor and ignorant people?" "Islam today," he answered me sorrowfully, "skulks in the mosques and doesn't go beyond them to the outside world." Believing "in the intellect and in freedom of choice," the Sheikh unknowingly fills him with a burning desire to seek out other lands in order to learn how to reform the land of Islam. As young manhood arrives he sets off to the land of Mashriq, a primitive land where people live in a state of nature, naked and worshipping the moon, "merging into universal lovemaking." In the land of Haira the king is worshipped and all dissenting voices are ruthlessly suppressed. Around the king's palace are human heads afixed to the top of poles: I went off, certain that they were martyrs to justice and liberty, deducing this from what usually occurs in the land of divine Revelation. This is a strange world replete with madness. . . . This critical voice is the voice of Mahfouz himself. Ibn Fattouma is eventually thrown, unjustly, for twenty years, into prison, where he converses with other prisoners who had "questioned critically some of the anomalous actions pertaining to justice and human freedom." Noticing everywhere similar evils in his homeland, he begins to worry that the land of perfection does not exist in this world and is suddenly just as arbitrarily released. The next land is Halba, the land of freedom, where "god is reason" and the poor are "several degrees better off than the poor of Haira and Mashriq." Despite murders and raucous demonstrations, Ibn Fattouma describes it as a land of plenty, free of despotism, and where "All religions are to be found," including "atheists and pagans." At one point Ibn Fattouma remarks, "The life of every people is generally revealed through some basic idea," reminding me of the historian Ibn Khaldun's emphasis on "group feeling." After Ibn Fattouma criticizes Halba as a land of irreligion and "anarchy," lacking "some moral basis," an assimilated Halba imam tells him, Your homeland is the land of Islam, and what do you find there? A tyrannical ruler who rules to please himself, so where is the moral basis? Men of religion who bring religion into subjection to serve the ruler, so where is the moral basis? Mahfouz has the rare penetrating intellect and courage to confront issues of central importance to Islam in the twentieth century, whether in Egypt, the Middle East, or India. The land of Aman is one of "total justice" and "armed guards" spying on everyone, robbing people "of all spirit of adventure and freedom," while the state "owns everything." He is told "proudly, 'Our land is the only one in which you will not come across illusions and superstitions.'" Shortly, calvary parade by, their lances tipped with human heads. Quickly traveling on, the land of Ghuroub, patently India, proves "a paradise of people in a trance." In the forests men and women, recluses devoted to "communal singing," prepare "themselves for the journey to the land of Gebel," perfection at last. Finally ascending a mountain to Gebel, Ibn Fattouma writes "a journal of my travels," the book itself, as it were, sending it back to the land of Islam hoping it will do some good. Mahfouz has sent many messages. In January of 1994 he wrote a public statement, which he and dozens of prominent Egyptian writers and artists signed and which is just as applicable to Islam elsewhere, titled "Against Cultural Terrorism": "All of Egypt is desperately searching for the freedom of thought. . . . As a result of religion, we are suffering." Mahfouz, in October 1994, at the age of eighty-three, was stabbed in the neck by an Islamic fanatic, aided by over twenty accomplices, nearly killing him and severing a nerve impairing his control of his writing hand. Many writers and innocent people in India, Hindu and Muslim, have met with the same kind of violence or oppression, not the least of whom is Salman Rushdie. It seems to me that the Bahai Faith is heading (no pun intended) down the same road of oppression and fanaticism as Islam, a religion Mahfouz and Rushdie have rightly reveal to be bankrupt, corrupt, atrophied, beyond restoration in any way whatsoever.... lacking all moral basis.... self-discredited.... by its own ayatollahs.... To cavil that HE said this or that, in the Quran or anywhere else, is ludicrous in the extreme.... -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Tue Jul 29 08:33:40 1997 >From nf6y@faraday.clas.virginia.edu Fri Jul 25 14:35:44 1997 Received: from faraday.clas.virginia.edu by mail.virginia.edu id aa29881; 25 Jul 97 17:35 EDT Received: (from nf6y@localhost) by faraday.clas.Virginia.EDU (8.8.5/8.6.6) id RAA217974 for FG@hotmail.com; Fri, 25 Jul 1997 17:35:37 -0400 Date: Fri, 25 Jul 1997 17:35:37 -0400 From: Nafeh Fananapazir Message-Id: <199707252135.RAA217974@faraday.clas.Virginia.EDU> To: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Islam & Bahai Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc,soc.culture.iranian,soc.culture.israel,soc.rights.human,alt.religi on.islam Organization: uva X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 266 -- Dear Frederick Glaysher, Allah'u'Abha... I really admire the works of Naguib Mahfouz: particularly, "The Journey of Ibn Fattouma" "The Children of Gebelaawi" and "Thousand and One Nights" Excellent posting. Baha'i love, nafeh fananapazir From - Fri May 09 07:42:30 1997 >From spanky9114@aol.com Thu May 8 14:12:32 1997 Received: (from root@localhost) by emout24.mail.aol.com (8.7.6/8.7.3/AOL-2.0.0) id RAA17678 for FG@hotmail.com; Thu, 8 May 1997 17:10:18 -0400 (EDT) Date: Thu, 8 May 1997 17:10:18 -0400 (EDT) From: Spanky9114@aol.com Message-ID: <970508162521_-97308529@emout19.mail.aol.com> To: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Islam & Bahai Faith X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 1777 In a message dated 5/8/97 6:52:01 AM, you wrote: <<> dictatorial body that silences all dissent with excommunication. What's the basis for your stating its a "dictatorial body that silences all dissent with excommunication"? >I>> Dear Mr. Glaysher: The dreaded "covenant breakers" are a perfect example. Other dissenters like homosexuals, etc. can have their voting (ie administrative) privileges rescinded or suspended. You know the facts Mr. Glaysher. The Bahai Faith is nothing more than a legistic social organization straining every working braincell to manipulate facts to understand how Shoghi Effendi died intestate and leaving no living guardian. The silence which has surrounded the machinations of the Hands of the Cause in deeming the guardianship abrogated is a cause for suspicion. Discussion of this matter is usually avoided in Bahai circles, and Bahais who question the role of the UHJ are often regarded with suspicion. All Bahais in good standing are required to accept the rulings of the UHJ as God's Will. Nevermind that there is undoubtedly a great deal of fallibility, and lack of insight among the individual members. Sorry, I prefer Islam where my relationship with Allah is my own and in which there is room for heterogeneity, so that I can be a shiah if I like, Ismaili if I like, and where there is no ordained clergy. Ordained, elected, its all the same, the UHJ, national and local assemblies are the agents through which the bahai doctrines are maintained according to the party line. Look at your own case and the censorship of the soc.religion.bahai group. I myself have been silenced for not posting along "party lines". You know the truth as well as I. Sincere Regards: Harry From - Tue Jul 29 08:33:44 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Tue Jul 29 05:27:33 1997 Received: (qmail 21754 invoked from network); 29 Jul 1997 12:27:29 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.119) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 29 Jul 1997 12:27:29 -0000 Message-ID: <33DDE212.6CA6@hotmail.com> Date: Tue, 29 Jul 1997 08:29:06 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc,soc.rights.human,soc.culture.israel,soc.culture.iranian CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Islam & Day of Judgement References: <870085208.9859@dejanews.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 1802 nokhodchi@hotmail.com wrote: > > Hello everyone, > > I have been away for a couple of days now and I see our bahai friends are > still posting articles. I have come to the conclusion that we are going > in circles in argumentation. I am going to be spending more energy > instead on expanding the website that I have. I would like to remind > everyone of several new additions to the site: > > 1) Bible has been corrupted or not? section, which examines that > question. As we all know by now, Islam says bible is corrupted while > bahaullah said that no it is not, it is simply badly "interpreted". > > 2) Expanded "Prophecy of Muhammad in the Bible" section > > 3) Some extra links like "Stories of Converts to Islam" and "25 > Frequently asked questions" which examines the 25 most often quoted > verses from the bible that Christians use to prove Jesus's divinity. How about a section on Salman Rushdie, Naguib Mahfouz, and other writers and people who have attacked, threatened, or brutalized by Islamic fanatics? It seems to me such a section would fit in quite well on your Bahai site since the religion seems to share the same intolerant, ignorant attitudes as Islam when in comes to free speech and religious conscience.... [clip,etc....] > For the above articles I refer you to my site that examines the bahai > faith: > > https://www.geocities.com/pentagon/3016/index.htm > > afrashteh@geocities.com > > Afshin Afrashteh aka the NOKHODCHI > > -------------------==== Posted via Deja News ====----------------------- > https://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Post to Usenet -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Thu Aug 21 08:43:10 1997 >From news@lana.pathlink.com Thu Aug 21 04:33:05 1997 Received: (from news@localhost) by lana.pathlink.com (8.8.6/8.8.5) id EAA09690; Thu, 21 Aug 1997 04:32:55 -0700 (PDT) To: srb@bcca.org Path: newsp.zippo.com!news2 From: FG Newsgroups: soc.religion.bahai Subject: Justice Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 07:34:41 -0400 Organization: None Lines: 20 Message-ID: <33FC27D1.4EBF@hotmail.com> Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com NNTP-Posting-Host: glaysher@199.179.42.20 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) CC: FG@hotmail.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 690 "O SON OF SPIRIT! "The best beloved of all things in My sigh is Justice; turn not away therefrom if thou desirest me, and neglect it not that I may confide in thee. By its aid thou shalt see with thine own eyes and not through the eyes of others, and shalt know of thine own knowledge and not through the knowledge of thy neighbor. Ponder this in thy heart; how it behooveth thee to be. Verily justice is My gift to thee and the sign of My loving-kindness. Set it then before thine eyes." Baha'u'llah, Hidden Words, #2. -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Thu Aug 21 08:43:11 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Thu Aug 21 04:34:45 1997 Received: (qmail 15460 invoked from network); 21 Aug 1997 11:33:06 -0000 Received: from ts?rh.metronet.lib.mi.us (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.20) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 21 Aug 1997 11:33:06 -0000 Message-ID: <33FC27D1.4EBF@hotmail.com> Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 07:34:41 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: soc.religion.bahai CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Justice Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 690 "O SON OF SPIRIT! "The best beloved of all things in My sigh is Justice; turn not away therefrom if thou desirest me, and neglect it not that I may confide in thee. By its aid thou shalt see with thine own eyes and not through the eyes of others, and shalt know of thine own knowledge and not through the knowledge of thy neighbor. Ponder this in thy heart; how it behooveth thee to be. Verily justice is My gift to thee and the sign of My loving-kindness. Set it then before thine eyes." Baha'u'llah, Hidden Words, #2. -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Fri Aug 22 10:12:50 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Fri Aug 22 05:36:44 1997 Received: (qmail 14426 invoked from network); 22 Aug 1997 12:36:42 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.118) by hm3.hotmail.com with SMTP; 22 Aug 1997 12:36:42 -0000 Message-ID: <33FD8841.6A53@hotmail.com> Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 08:38:25 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Justice Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 693 "O SON OF SPIRIT! "The best beloved of all things in My sight is Justice; turn not away therefrom if thou desirest me, and neglect it not that I may confide in thee. By its aid thou shalt see with thine own eyes and not through the eyes of others, and shalt know of thine own knowledge and not through the knowledge of thy neighbor. Ponder this in thy heart; how it behooveth thee to be. Verily justice is My gift to thee and the sign of My loving-kindness. Set it then before thine eyes." Baha'u'llah, Hidden Words, #2. -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Thu Jun 12 05:54:34 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Wed Jun 11 03:48:08 1997 Received: (qmail 396 invoked from network); 11 Jun 1997 10:48:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.119) by hm3.hotmail.com with SMTP; 11 Jun 1997 10:48:06 -0000 Message-ID: <339E82B5.5F74@hotmail.com> Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 06:49:25 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,misc.misc Subject: list of Usenet servers Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 2371 This list of news servers is from somewhere on geocities.com. baracka.rz.uni-augsburg.de and ftp.louisa.net are the only two that I think permit reading and posting to alt.religion.bahai If you find any others please post to that effect.... -- Here's the list of servers sorted by posting & groups: Server Name:Posting:Number of Groups: graylady.usa1.comYes39027 news.clandjop.comYes34221 wormhole.koener.comYes32874 news.fm-net.comYes32727 206.103.97.91Yes29771 news.bserv.comYes29155 news.triax.comYes28536 208.135.168.98Yes28522 news.mega-com.comYes28079 207.48.53.203Yes27731 news.vsnl.net.inYes27704 tdsi1.tdsi.netYes27052 ntweb.macrotron.deYes26445 news.idt.netYes26119 news.presto.netYes25334 informer.alliance.netYes25098 news.alliance.netYes24776 fremen.xsite.netYes24485 news.codenet.netYes23988 205.186.245.7Yes21626 news.itd.umich.eduYes21586 news.interline.netYes21374 server1.mich.comYes21339 scipio.cyberstore.caYes21123 no2.i-way.netYes20908 news.iop.comYes19797 news.savvis.comYes19668 smarti2.smartworld.netYes19316 207.78.28.2Yes19124 gbnet-www2.gbm.netYes19058 server05.computron.netYes18675 news.nesbittburns.caYes17698 frap.fastrans.netYes17215 news.quebectel.comYes17150 stallion.mikuni.comYes16604 morgan.iocenter.netYes16322 news.doha.netYes16040 tera.jprc.comYes15900 199.227.249.34Yes15896 news.ctc.eduYes15842 lagoon.idirect.comYes14080 mail.castrop-rauxel.netsurf .deYes13448 news.turnet.net.trYes12072 208.201.14.16Yes11836 hct.ac.ae Yes11086 news.knox.eduYes10420 co.orange.ca.usYes10197 Main info page Servers by dateServers by posting and groups 1:00 AM EST 5-7-979:00 PM EST 4-20-979:00 PM EST 4-20-97 Please send your comments, suggestions, and corrections on inaccurate information about servers to [Please do not mail me to tell me that a server says, "You have no permission to talk" This message means that the server is only down for your ISP (i.e. aol.com, ix.netcom.com). Although others with different ISP's might be able to use that server. Thanks for your cooperation.]: Copyright 1997 Tony Perez at176@detroit.freenet.org Return to GeoCities Hollywood -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Thu May 29 05:59:09 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Wed May 28 03:36:29 1997 Received: (qmail 20786 invoked from network); 28 May 1997 10:36:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.118) by hm2.hotmail.com with SMTP; 28 May 1997 10:36:28 -0000 Message-ID: <338C0AF8.44B5@hotmail.com> Date: Wed, 28 May 1997 06:37:44 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,misc.misc,talk.religion.misc CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Listserv access Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 400 I've recently received another message from someone apparently having trouble obtaining access to alt.religion.bahai.... It's easy almost to forget that there are others who have been denied such access by the NO vote results and think everything is fine.... Anybody techically saavy enough to hook up alt.religion.bahai to a listserv? -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Thu Jun 05 07:13:45 1997 >From aenglish@scnc.waverly.k12.mi.us Wed Jun 4 13:41:00 1997 Received: from pm245-19.dialip.mich.net (pm245-19.dialip.mich.net [35.9.9.52]) by scnc.waverly.k12.mi.us (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id QAA12119 for ; Wed, 4 Jun 1997 16:40:55 -0400 (EDT) From: aenglish@scnc.waverly.k12.mi.us (Andrea) To: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Listserv access Date: Wed, 04 Jun 1997 20:40:42 GMT Organization: Waverly High School Reply-To: aenglish@scnc.waverly.k12.mi.us Message-ID: <3395d27c.358653031@scnc.waverly.k12.mi.us> References: <338C0AF8.44B5@hotmail.com> <3395cf77.357880358@news.idt.net> In-Reply-To: <3395cf77.357880358@news.idt.net> X-Mailer: Forte Free Agent 1.1/32.230 X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 713 The news server (it's public) that I've just discovered gives access to alt.religion.bahai is news.idt.net. Anyone interested might want to try it :). -Andrea :) aenglish@scnc.waverly.k12.mi.us On Wed, 28 May 1997 06:37:44 -0400, Frederick Glaysher wrote: >I've recently received another message from someone apparently >having trouble obtaining access to alt.religion.bahai.... It's >easy almost to forget that there are others who have been denied such >access by the NO vote results and think everything is fine.... > >Anybody techically saavy enough to hook up alt.religion.bahai >to a listserv? > >-- >Frederick Glaysher >UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Thu Jun 05 07:13:51 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Thu Jun 5 04:10:26 1997 Received: (qmail 18349 invoked from network); 5 Jun 1997 11:08:48 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.123) by hm2.hotmail.com with SMTP; 5 Jun 1997 11:08:48 -0000 Message-ID: <33969E85.61F0@hotmail.com> Date: Thu, 05 Jun 1997 07:09:57 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,misc.misc,talk.religion.misc To: aenglish@scnc.waverly.k12.mi.us CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Listserv access References: <338C0AF8.44B5@hotmail.com> <3395cf77.357880358@news.idt.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 1189 Andrea wrote: > > The news server (it's public) that I've just discovered gives access > is news.idt.net. Anyone interested might want to try it :). > -Andrea :) > aenglish@scnc.waverly.k12.mi.us All right, I tried it and got the following error message: A news NNTP error occurred: You have no permission to talk. What have I done wrong? I added news.idt.net under my Netscape Mail and News Preferences, Servers, NEWS Servers.... Clicked OK, then tried connecting.... It's 7:00am my time.... Any ideas? Fred -- > > On Wed, 28 May 1997 06:37:44 -0400, Frederick Glaysher > wrote: > > >I've recently received another message from someone apparently > >having trouble obtaining access to alt.religion.bahai.... It's > >easy almost to forget that there are others who have been denied such > >access by the NO vote results and think everything is fine.... > > > >Anybody techically saavy enough to hook up alt.religion.bahai > >to a listserv? > > > >-- > >Frederick Glaysher > >UseNet: alt.religion.bahai -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Fri Jun 06 07:44:35 1997 >From aenglish@scnc.waverly.k12.mi.us Thu Jun 5 07:10:29 1997 Received: from andrea (pm168-12.dialip.mich.net [35.9.15.113]) by scnc.waverly.k12.mi.us (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id KAA06102 for ; Thu, 5 Jun 1997 10:09:36 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <3396C88D.2939@scnc.waverly.k12.mi.us> Date: Thu, 05 Jun 1997 10:09:17 -0400 From: Andrea Reply-To: aenglish@scnc.waverly.k12.mi.us Organization: Waverly High School X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: FG@hotmail.com Subject: alt.religion.bahai (was re: listserv access) References: <338C0AF8.44B5@hotmail.com> <3395cf77.357880358@news.idt.net> <33969E85.61F0@hotmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 216 Okay, Try news.tln.lib.mi.us; this seems to work for me as well, although I don't know about everyone. I'll keep looking, and see if I can find others :). -Andrea :) aenglish@scnc.waverly.k12.mi.us From - Fri Jun 06 07:44:34 1997 >From aenglish@scnc.waverly.k12.mi.us Thu Jun 5 06:33:27 1997 Received: from andrea (pm168-12.dialip.mich.net [35.9.15.113]) by scnc.waverly.k12.mi.us (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id JAA05284 for ; Thu, 5 Jun 1997 09:33:24 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <3396C015.1BB@scnc.waverly.k12.mi.us> Date: Thu, 05 Jun 1997 09:33:09 -0400 From: Andrea Reply-To: aenglish@scnc.waverly.k12.mi.us Organization: Waverly High School X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Listserv access References: <338C0AF8.44B5@hotmail.com> <3395cf77.357880358@news.idt.net> <33969E85.61F0@hotmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 394 Hi, I'm not sure what's wrong. This server always works fine for me. Perhaps it's your service provider, it could have been banned somehow in the past. At any rate, perhaps it'll work for some people, at least, and I'll continue to look for public servers that carry alt.religion.bahai. I'll let you know if I find anything :). -Andrea :) aenglish@scnc.waverly.k12.mi.us From - Thu May 29 07:52:40 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Thu May 29 04:21:47 1997 Received: (qmail 20685 invoked from network); 29 May 1997 11:21:45 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.121) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 29 May 1997 11:21:45 -0000 Message-ID: <338D6717.4D01@hotmail.com> Date: Thu, 29 May 1997 07:23:03 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: neimagebla@geocities.com CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Listserv: alt.religion.bahai Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 2071 > From: neimagebla@geocities.com (Pedro Macan=E1s Valverde :-# mu.es) > Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,bit.admin,alt.config > Subject: Re: email echo/listserv: alt.religion.bahai > Date: Sun, 18 May 1997 16:51:27 GMT > Organization: Unisource Espana NEWS SERVER > Lines: 23 > Message-ID: <335a0215.10282838@news.arrakis.es> > References: <5int1b$jpm$1@bilbo.reference.com> > Reply-To: mac@royal.net > NNTP-Posting-Host: 195.5.65.3 > X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.1/16.230 > = > 14 Apr 1997 17:05:58 -0400, jim@american.edu (Jim McIntosh) skribis: > = > >In article <5int1b$jpm$1@bilbo.reference.com>, FG@hotmail.com w= rote: > >> Can you set up, or help me set up, an email echo/listserv for > >> alt.religion.bahai? > > > >First of all, FG@hotmail.com doesn't seem to be a valid e-mail > >address so I'm not sure who I'm talking to: My email address is valid. My server may have been down temporarily or something.... > > > > ----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors ----- > >FG@hotmail.com > > > > ----- Transcript of session follows ----- > >... while talking to mail.hotmail.com.: > >>>> DATA > ><<< 550 Unknown user > >554 FG@hotmail.com... Service unavailable > > > >Second, in response to your inquiry, we cannot set up a list for you b= ut if > >you get a list we can connect it to the newsgroup. > > > = > You can get a mailing list at https://www.mundivia.es . Pedro, = Is there any way you could help set up a listserv mailing list at www.mundivia.es? I've checked it out but my Spanish leaves much to be desired.... I've got the instructiion list from there but am lost on the details and don't want to mess up their server or something else by trying it on my own. I'd appreciate any help you can offer. Once the listserv is = set up somewhere I know someone else who will connect it to alt.religion.bahai Thanks. -- = Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Sun Jun 01 09:55:09 1997 >From pmacvalverde@chusuk.arrakis.es Fri May 30 16:51:25 1997 Received: from smtp.arrakis.es (ib-194.arrakis.es [195.5.71.194]) by landsraad.net (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id BAA08899 for ; Sat, 31 May 1997 01:51:18 +0200 (MET DST) Message-Id: <3.0.16.19970531012551.3af7b714@pop.arrakis.es> X-Sender: pmacvalverde@pop.arrakis.es X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0 Demo (16) Date: Sat, 31 May 1997 01:53:02 +0200 To: FG@hotmail.com From: Pedro =?iso-8859-1?Q?Macan=E1s?= Subject: Re: Listserv: alt.religion.bahai Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 711 I=B4ll try it, but I=B4m not a professional. I hope there will be fortune. Yours. Pedro Macan=E1s. At 07:23 29/05/97 -0400, you wrote: > >Pedro,=20 > >Is there any way you could help set up a listserv mailing list at >www.mundivia.es? I've checked it out but my Spanish leaves much >to be desired.... I've got the instructiion list from there but >am lost on the details and don't want to mess up their server or >something else by trying it on my own. > >I'd appreciate any help you can offer. Once the listserv is=20 >set up somewhere I know someone else who will connect it to >alt.religion.bahai > >Thanks. > >--=20 >Frederick Glaysher >UseNet: alt.religion.bahai > > From - Tue Aug 12 13:48:35 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Tue Aug 12 04:53:12 1997 Received: (qmail 21171 invoked from network); 12 Aug 1997 11:53:07 -0000 Received: from ts?rh.metronet.lib.mi.us (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.20) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 12 Aug 1997 11:53:07 -0000 Message-ID: <33F04F08.DFA@hotmail.com> Date: Tue, 12 Aug 1997 07:54:48 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc,soc.rights.human CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Lost messages on SRB? (was Re: More ...) References: <1997Aug10.033218.10032@leo.vsla.edu> <5snmht$a5g$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 5880 Donald Zhang Osborn wrote: > > Chris wrote: > >In a message which I read on alt.religion.bahai, "K. Paul Johnson" > > wrote > [snip] > >>Ever since the creation of alt.religion.bahai, however, there > >>has been far less criticism and questioning on s.r.b. I had > >>two or three posts simply not appear, with no word from the > >>moderators. But later I did get a rejection notice from a > >>moderator for a post, so don't know what to make of it. > [snip] > > > >You are right about posts disappearing. A short while ago I sent > >several posts (unusual for me) to s.r.b, none of which were put up and > >none of which were rejected. I followed this up with an e-mail to one > >of the moderators and it was confirmed that they had got iunto the > >system but that for some reason none of the moderators had seen them, > >which was why they were neither posted nor rejected. At that time (and > >I am referring to a period in the last 2 months, there were problems > >with the computer system handling all baha'i messages, which includes > >posts to s.r.b, which lead to some posts getting lost andd others being > >disseminated several times. In the event one of my messages was no > >longer relevant and the other was posted. I have had the same problem > >in the past where messages have just disappeared and could not be found > >which lead me to start posting direct to the newsgroup instead of > >through moderators.uu.net. > [snip] > > I've noted a few messages to s.r.b. have been lost too, since before the > t.r.b. discussion or creation of a.r.b. This has happened several times, > and I don't think it was because the messages were problematic from the point > of view of the s.r.b. charter. At one point I posted from Netscape using > both the post to & mail to functions; then I received a polite message from > one of the moderators informing me that my messages were coming in quadruplicate > (!) -- apparently something in my Netscape or the computer on the other end > was duplicating each message I sent out (?). > > Anyway, I wanted to make a couple of suggestions re this subject and more > generally discussions about the s.r.b. moderators. The latter first: > > 1. Part of the problem may be computer related, as Chris implies, but another > part may relate to honest human error. One time a "lost" message of mine > was found by one of the moderators on his computer. Evidently the moderators > take turns, and I think that during that time, messages are forwarded to their > personal accounts. I'm wondering if some messages "fall through the cracks" as > it were, during the time of a change from one moderator to another, either (a) > not being forwarded at all, or (b) being forwarded to someone who was previously > the moderator (i.e. slow change of forwarding). > Also, one of the moderators asked me about a message I sent to the s.r.b. list > was intended for a different list (Bahai-discuss; by chance it was right on topic > for a thread on that list). This indicated to me the possibility that a moderator > could get messages mixed up - something that I think happened with one posting I > made first to Bahai-discuss, then after a few days to s.r.b. (i.e., my message > to s.r.b. might have looked like a follow-up to my original message to B-D). > > 2. I also have a technical question about whether some messages might go out > to the list that's gated to s.r.b., but not make it to s.r.b. -- due to an > oversight (missing command) by a moderator or a computer glitch. > > 3. Also, I understand that the volume of messages received by s.r.b. has > increased in the time since t.r.b./a.r.b. discussions began. If so (perhaps > someone can confirm) then any problems in the system would naturally increase > too. All the above gives SRB more credit than it deserves in my estimation.... The messages from me that have never appeared and were never acknowledged were precisely ones that were more provocative and engaging. I don't believe that was a coincidence or computer error. What we have here from Mr. Osborn is clearly a piece of damage control, in my opinion. > > 4. Finally, I've been troubled by the tendency in some postings to > depersonalize, or worse yet demonize, the people who have volunteered to > moderate on s.r.b. Remember that these are individuals who have volunteered > their own time & effort to provide a service that in the long run has made > possible discussion of the Baha'i religion free of the kind of flames and noise > that can make productive discussion difficult. This is not to say that the > system is flawless or the moderating decisions perfect (a disclaimer in case > someone comes at me with either-or logic), and certainly constructive criticism > might help to improve it and help the volunteers working on it. But please > remember that the moderators on s.r.b. are people. Demonize? Actually it's just that so many people have experienced the same phenomenon: censorship.... Clearly it must be organized, indeed orchestrated, by someone, or some body.... The conclusion is inescapable.... Look at what my original message was on the United Nations--which was suppressed for no good reason in my opinion. > > The problem of "missing messages," such as it may be, would seem to be related > in large part to human error, and nothing at all sinister. Bahais are capable of being just as sinister as any other human beings though imagine otherwise and would like others to think so.... They are made of the same flawed material.... > > DZO -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Sat Aug 16 07:59:17 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Sat Aug 16 03:34:34 1997 Received: (qmail 12740 invoked from network); 16 Aug 1997 10:34:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.117) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 16 Aug 1997 10:34:32 -0000 Message-ID: <33F5829D.F49@hotmail.com> Date: Sat, 16 Aug 1997 06:36:13 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: "Flawed" or "Noble"? (was Re: Lost messages...) References: <1997Aug10.033218.10032@leo.vsla.edu> <5snmht$a5g$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <33F04F08.DFA@hotmail.com> <33F48CED.1CAB@pilot.NOSPAMmsu.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 2583 Donald Zhang Osborn wrote: > = > Frederick Glaysher wrote: > > Bahais are capable of being just as sinister as any > > other human beings though imagine otherwise and > > would like others to think so.... They are made of > > the same flawed material.... > = > Please speak for yourself. In any event, no Baha'i, > I'm sure, would claim to be "better" than anyone else. > We do have an advantage *IF* we choose to avail ourselves > of it, and that is the Baha'i teachings. As for "flawed" > material, my understanding is different - imperfection, of > course, but flawed as I hear it implies a fundamental > defect that would prevent us from achieving our purpose. > Yet the Writings repeatedly refer to our *potential* to > know God through His Messengers and to reflect Divine > virtues. The Hidden Words even refer to humans as "noble" > in essence, but then take us to task for not doing justice > to that heritage. Hardly "flawed" but clearly requiring > work. The attached are among many quotes in this vein. Thank you for revealing so much.... > DZO > = > "13. O SON OF SPIRIT! > "I created thee rich, why dost thou bring thyself down to poverty? Nobl= e > I made thee, wherewith dost thou abase thyself? Out of the essence of > knowledge I gave thee being, why seekest thou enlightenment from anyone= > beside Me? Out of the clay of love I molded thee, how dost thou busy > thyself with another? Turn thy sight unto thyself, that thou mayest fin= d > Me standing within thee, mighty, powerful and self-subsisting." > = > "22. O SON OF SPIRIT! > "Noble have I created thee, yet thou hast abased thyself. Rise then unt= o > that for which thou wast created." > = > _The Hidden Words of Bah=E1'u'll=E1h (Arabic)_, pp. 13, 22 > = > "We humans are never going to become perfect, for perfection belongs to= > a realm we are not destined to enter. However, we must constantly mount= > higher, seek to be more perfect. The ego is the animal in us, the > heritage of the flesh which is full of selfish desires. By obeying the > laws of God, seeking to live the life laid down in our teachings, and > prayer and struggle, we can subdue our egos. We call people `saints' wh= o > have achieved the highest degree of mastery over their egos." > _Unfolding Destiny_, by Shoghi Effendi, p. 453: > = > https://sunsite.unc.edu/bahai-bin/true-seeker.pl -- = Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on = www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Sat Aug 16 06:19:21 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Fri Aug 15 04:53:47 1997 Received: (qmail 670 invoked from network); 15 Aug 1997 11:53:43 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.121) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 15 Aug 1997 11:53:43 -0000 Message-ID: <33F443AB.C26@hotmail.com> Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 07:55:23 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc,news.admin.censorship,news.admin.net-abuse.misc,news.admi n.misc CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Lost messages on SRB? (was Re: More ...) References: <1997Aug10.033218.10032@leo.vsla.edu> <5snmht$a5g$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <33F04F08.DFA@hotmail.com> <5svudh$8pc$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 1189 Donald Zhang Osborn wrote: > > Frederick Glaysher wrote: > >more provocative and engaging. I don't believe that was a > >coincidence or computer error. What we have here from Mr. > >Osborn is clearly a piece of damage control, in my > >opinion. > > No damage. No damage control. Just reacting to what seems > like canned negative thinking by suggesting other possible > explanations based on a broader look at what kind of > messages didn't make it. Clearly it is not just messages > which push the limit (as per the s.r.b. charter) that have > not appeared, so it seems logical to look for a broader > range of explanations. This is not to claim that the > suggestions I offered are necessarily right, but that > someone needed to bring them up for there to be a fair > discussion. After all, isn't the purpose finding out what > happened? The best explanation is what others have suggested: SRB is using the "overload" to suppress what it doesn't want to post.... > > DZO -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Sat Aug 16 07:59:14 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Sat Aug 16 03:29:21 1997 Received: (qmail 11300 invoked from network); 16 Aug 1997 10:29:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.117) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 16 Aug 1997 10:29:19 -0000 Message-ID: <33F58163.8E5@hotmail.com> Date: Sat, 16 Aug 1997 06:30:59 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc,news.admin.censorship,news.admin.misc,news.admin.net-abus e.misc CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Lost messages on SRB? (was Re: More ...) References: <1997Aug10.033218.10032@leo.vsla.edu> <5snmht$a5g$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <33F04F08.DFA@hotmail.com> <5svudh$8pc$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <33F443AB.C26@hotmail.com> <5t1o62$n4e$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 700 Donald Zhang Osborn wrote: > > Frederick Glaysher wrote: > >The best explanation is what others have suggested: > >SRB is using the "overload" to suppress what it doesn't > >want to post.... > > Then why have utterly uncontroversial (which is not to > say uninteresting, of course :) ) messages not been > posted? Dubious claim at best, unsupported by documentation.... Especially in the light that others have stated messages they construed as other than "uncontroversial" were suppressed. > > DZO -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Mon Aug 18 10:19:18 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Mon Aug 18 05:49:09 1997 Received: (qmail 16222 invoked from network); 18 Aug 1997 12:49:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.121) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 18 Aug 1997 12:49:07 -0000 Message-ID: <33F84522.1BFA@hotmail.com> Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 08:50:42 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc,news.admin.censorship,news.admin.net-abuse.misc,news.admi n.misc,soc.rights.human CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Lost messages on SRB? (was Re: More ...) References: <1997Aug10.033218.10032@leo.vsla.edu> <5snmht$a5g$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <33F04F08.DFA@hotmail.com> <5svudh$8pc$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <33F443AB.C26@hotmail.com> <5t1o62$n4e$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <33F58163.8E5@hotmail.com> <5t5fvi$9hd$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 1478 Donald Zhang Osborn wrote: > > Frederick Glaysher wrote: > >Donald Zhang Osborn wrote: > >> Frederick Glaysher wrote: > >> >The best explanation is what others have suggested: > >> >SRB is using the "overload" to suppress what it doesn't > >> >want to post.... > >> > >> Then why have utterly uncontroversial (which is not to > >> say uninteresting, of course :) ) messages not been > >> posted? > > > >Dubious claim at best, unsupported by documentation.... > > What??! First of all, I don't keep "documentation" on the > messages I've sent to this or that group, nor do I imagine do > 99+% of other Usenet users. I've enough to keep track of in > my studies, work, and family anyway. Second, though you > probably didn't intend it this way, by calling my statement > "dubious" you have gratuitously called into question my integrity > (no need to apologize, but please, Frederick, think about what > you are writing). It seems doubtful, at best, to me.... Sorry if that hurts your feelings.... You provide no evidence that the messages that have been "lost" are non-controversial.... I know I have sent them controversial ones and that have conveniently been "lost." Others have said the same. [clip] > Hope this helps! > > DZO -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Tue Aug 19 08:59:56 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Tue Aug 19 04:41:25 1997 Received: (qmail 28890 invoked from network); 19 Aug 1997 11:41:23 -0000 Received: from ts?rh.metronet.lib.mi.us (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.20) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 19 Aug 1997 11:41:23 -0000 Message-ID: <33F986CB.1F53@hotmail.com> Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 07:43:07 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc,news.admin.censorship,news.groups CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Lost messages not always the issue References: <1997Aug10.033218.10032@leo.vsla.edu> <5snmht$a5g$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <33F04F08.DFA@hotmail.com> <5svudh$8pc$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <33F443AB.C26@hotmail.com> <5t1o62$n4e$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <33F58163.8E5@hotmail.com> <5t5fvi$9hd$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <33F84522.1BFA@hotmail.com> <5t9p3u$k77$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <33F9194B.47A9@bcgrizzly.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 1867 Maureen Atkinson wrote: > > You guys (Donald, Chris and Fred) have exchanges constantly about the > legitmacy of SRB and missing posting - please don't think you are the > only ones who have issues with the moderators or that everything should > be taken and debated so personally all the time. > > The bigger point to me about recent lack of re-postings on SRB is the > turnaround time for responses to postings threads and and interesting > discussions are getting chopped and lost since there is little follow-up > to any really interesting discussions. As with television, radio or any > ohter such medium, folks are not going to tune in if there isn't anything > new being discussed or if they are continually frustrated by lack of > moderated response. > > Now we all know that you won't likely see this post on SRB - but this is > solely because I have given up trying to send postings to them not > because I have a major problem with a "moderated" format. If SRB is to be > affective teaching tool for both Baha'is and Non Baha'is then there has > less intervention and more of a forum. I think you're right that ideally there should be "less intervention and more of a forum" on soc.religion.bahai.... But the fact remains the moderators choose to intervene constantly destroying any sense of open forum.... All that is why I attempted to form talk.religion.bahai in the first place. Your experience merely duplicates mine and that of many others.... So we're in the same situation: the moderators refuse to learn from the experience and the only real solution is to vote YES on talk.religion.bahai this fall.... That's how I see it.... > > Best wishes, Maureen -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Tue Aug 19 08:59:47 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Tue Aug 19 04:44:15 1997 Received: (qmail 28902 invoked from network); 19 Aug 1997 11:44:13 -0000 Received: from ts?rh.metronet.lib.mi.us (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.20) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 19 Aug 1997 11:44:13 -0000 Message-ID: <33F98775.2860@hotmail.com> Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 07:45:57 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc,news.admin.censorship,news.groups CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Lost messages not always the issue References: <1997Aug10.033218.10032@leo.vsla.edu> <5snmht$a5g$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <33F04F08.DFA@hotmail.com> <5svudh$8pc$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <33F443AB.C26@hotmail.com> <5t1o62$n4e$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <33F58163.8E5@hotmail.com> <5t5fvi$9hd$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <33F84522.1BFA@hotmail.com> <5t9p3u$k77$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <33F9194B.47A9@bcgrizzly.com> <33F91A7B.B75@bcgrizzly.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 831 Maureen Atkinson wrote: > > I must apologize for the lack of coherentcy (sp) to my last posting - > Rambling thoughts without much structure. > However, in a nutshell - I beleive that SRB is shooting itself in the > foot by chopping the postings so drastically. People will tune out and > not subscribe if the content and dialogue is not of some quality. > regards maureen Well, that's basically what has and is happening.... I believe they've justly lost the trust and confidence of many Bahais and non-Bahais alike. And yet they subbornly cling to their censorious ways blaming.... ME! as though I were the only one rankled by their heavy-handed methods.... -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Tue Aug 19 08:59:45 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Tue Aug 19 04:36:36 1997 Received: (qmail 28876 invoked from network); 19 Aug 1997 11:36:35 -0000 Received: from ts?rh.metronet.lib.mi.us (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.20) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 19 Aug 1997 11:36:35 -0000 Message-ID: <33F985AA.3A3D@hotmail.com> Date: Tue, 19 Aug 1997 07:38:18 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc,news.admin.censorship,news.groups CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Lost messages on SRB? (was Re: More ...) References: <1997Aug10.033218.10032@leo.vsla.edu> <5snmht$a5g$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <33F04F08.DFA@hotmail.com> <5svudh$8pc$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <33F443AB.C26@hotmail.com> <5t1o62$n4e$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <33F58163.8E5@hotmail.com> <5t5fvi$9hd$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <33F84522.1BFA@hotmail.com> <5t9p3u$k77$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 2324 Donald Zhang Osborn wrote: > > Frederick Glaysher wrote: > >It seems doubtful, at best, to me.... Sorry if that hurts > >your feelings.... You provide no evidence that the messages > >that have been "lost" are non-controversial.... I know I > >have sent them controversial ones and that have conveniently > >been "lost." Others have said the same. > > Frederick, "Hurt feelings" is not the issue or even what I > was complaining about. Lack of respect is. No one is asking > you for "evidence" of the kind of messages you sent; I accept > your evaluation of your messages. For my part, I offer no > "evidence" either as I don't invest time in keeping such > records (part of the reason, too, that it has sometimes too > much bother to follow up on missing messages). I've given > my honest evaluation of my own postings and am dismayed at > your insistence on "doubting" that evaluation or finding it > "dubious." To me that's simple lack of respect, even if you > hadn't intended it that way (once again, please consider the > implications of your writing and actions). "Respect"? I don't believe or agree with your analysis of the censorship at soc.religion.bahai.... I simply said so.... That's lacking respect? Sorry.... Take it any way you want but I did not intend it that way or as an insult.... > > The fact is that the experience of you, me, Chris, and the > limited number of others that have commented on the situation, > when taken together, does not support the conclusion you had > originally proposed. In such a situation, one should gracefully > step back from insisting on the original hypothesis (there is > no shame in that, as it is the truth of the matter that we're > all after, isn't is?). That doesn't mean you have to publically > renounce your conclusion, only relax & keep an open mind as > research on the situation unfolds. Sorry you want to see me as "unrelaxed" or something but given the overwhelming duplicity of the moderators of soc.religion.bahai during the last several months I don't believe they merit any trust whatsoever.... Why do you? > > DZO -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Wed Aug 20 11:16:22 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Wed Aug 20 05:34:30 1997 Received: (qmail 6822 invoked from network); 20 Aug 1997 12:34:28 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.119) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 20 Aug 1997 12:34:28 -0000 Message-ID: <33FAE4B6.6978@hotmail.com> Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 08:36:06 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc,news.admin.censorship,news.admin.misc,news.admin.net-abus e.usent,news.admin.net-abuse.misc CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Lost messages on SRB? (was Re: More ...) References: <1997Aug10.033218.10032@leo.vsla.edu> <5snmht$a5g$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <33F04F08.DFA@hotmail.com> <5svudh$8pc$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <33F443AB.C26@hotmail.com> <5t1o62$n4e$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <33F58163.8E5@hotmail.com> <5t5fvi$9hd$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <33F84522.1BFA@hotmail.com> <5t9p3u$k77$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <33F985AA.3A3D@hotmail.com> <5tcdj8$bmm$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 3701 Donald Zhang Osborn wrote: > > Frederick Glaysher wrote: > >"Respect"? I don't believe or agree with your analysis of > >the censorship at soc.religion.bahai.... I simply said so.... > > Please let's not lose focus on exactly what we're talking about > here. Put all the jargan away for the moment as well as other > issues or experiences that may concern you. *Before* the "analysis" > of you or me or anyone else, there is an issue of some messages > that were sent to s.r.b., that were not rejected by the people > doing the moderating, but which were not posted on s.r.b. You > and perhaps a couple of others (I haven't kept count) suggested > that this was "suppression" of messages that those doing the > moderating did not want to put on s.r.b. I, and at least one other > have pointed out that messages that could not be construed as > "controversial" also didn't make it onto s.r.b. I simply stated I don't that analysis is true or accurate. I believe there is definitely a pronounced pattern of using it as an excuse for suppressing messages they don't know how to get rid of in any other way. > > A couple of us then look at the situation and remark that the > evidence (meaning the expressed experience) does not support the > notion of a pattern or predictable type of message that would be > "lost." I ask how one accounts for uncontroversial messages, and > you come back questioning not only the suggestion that there is > no pattern to the "lost" messages (or at least not one that has > anything to do with content or author), but also dismiss what I've > said about my experience with lost messages as "doubtful" and go > on about lack of "documentation" and "evidence." Again, I have the evidence of my own experience. And I have had numerous messages sent to soc.religion.bahai conveniently get "lost." And so have others who have said so which you wish to ignore preferring your own explanation of their innocence.... > > >That's lacking respect? Sorry.... Take it any way you want > >but I did not intend it that way or as an insult.... > > I accept that you didn't intend it as an insult, and as I've > said repeatedly, an apology is not necessary. Yet you must > realize that if people offer information from their experience > that does not support a hypothesis you suggest, and you dismiss > that information out of hand, that's hardly respectful. Who's now doing the dismissing? I believe it's you and your desire to make explanations and excuses for the unseemly conduct of the moderators at soc.religion.bahai. > > >Sorry you want to see me as "unrelaxed" or something > >but given the overwhelming duplicity of the moderators of > >soc.religion.bahai during the last several months I don't > >believe they merit any trust whatsoever.... Why do you? > > "Relax" as in relax your grip on the hypothesis that lost > messages were systematically "suppressed" long enough to hear > information that does not support that conclusion. I've heard your hearsay.... I don't believe it.... Again, you're ignoring others who say it has and is happening.... Why? > > The question remains how do you account for "uncontroversial" > messages as well as "controversial" messages being lost? I doubt "uncontroversial" messages are being lost. And I wouldn't doubt they have the calculation to "lose" occasionally innocuous messages in order to conceal or obscure their suppression of others.... > > DZO -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Thu Aug 21 08:43:15 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Thu Aug 21 05:08:53 1997 Received: (qmail 15620 invoked from network); 21 Aug 1997 12:08:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.20) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 21 Aug 1997 12:08:52 -0000 Message-ID: <33FC3036.6249@hotmail.com> Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 08:10:30 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.bahai,soc.rights.human,news.admin.censorship,news.admin.misc CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Lost messages on SRB? (was Re: More ...) References: <33F985AA.3A3D@hotmail.com> <5tcdj8$bmm$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <33FAE4B6.6978@hotmail.com> <5tf65c$al6@ds2.acs.ucalgary.ca> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 2084 T Hodges wrote: > > Several points: > > There doesn't appear to be censorship of ideas on soc.religion.bahai, > just of how offensively and repetitively those ideas are presented. > Mr. Glaysher regularly gets his posts accepted there (when he tones > down his rhetoric and includes new material). So do others who > complain about censorship. He and others apparently feel they > have a right to be abusive in public. What a laugh! I have five, FIVE, rejected messages from soc.religion.bahai in MY box this morning.... I'll be posting them soon to alt.religion.bahai. > > People are not being denied a venue for expressing themselves, I > found 27 posts here this morning. "Here" on alt.religion.bahai? > > I am very glad most (or all) of those 27 posts were not on > soc.religion.bahai as they are not appropriate due to being off topic, > being abusive, being repetitive, ... Most of the people reading > soc.religion.bahai (at least many) would stop looking at it if it > was filled up with this stuff. Oh horrors! Shield thine eyes! > > I suggested to Mr. Glaysher (when he first proposed an unmoderated > newsgroup) that he should set up an email list (very accessible) > to show that an unmoderated public discussion area would work for > such a controversial topic. This news group seems to be demonstrating > that it won't work in the way he was hoping for. Only in your opinion. I and others believe it's working quite well. It seems only those Bahais in favor of suppressing and manipulating everything said in public are unhappy with it.... > > As for a web page, it is pretty easy to program and there many books > and websites with instructions oin how to do it. One just needs a > real internet account that provides space. > > Tom > > -- > Tom Hodges thodges@freenet.calgary.ab.ca > Professional Agronomist, member Baha'i Faith, Go player -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Tue Sep 02 08:18:19 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Mon Sep 1 04:26:51 1997 Received: (qmail 28744 invoked from network); 1 Sep 1997 11:26:24 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.122) by hm3.hotmail.com with SMTP; 1 Sep 1997 11:26:24 -0000 Message-ID: <340AA6A8.2042@hotmail.com> Date: Mon, 01 Sep 1997 07:27:36 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc,news.admin.censorship,news.admin.net-abuse.misc,news.admi n.misc,soc.rights.human CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Lost messages on SRB? (was Re: More ...) References: <1997Aug10.033218.10032@leo.vsla.edu> <5snmht$a5g$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <33F04F08.DFA@hotmail.com> <5svudh$8pc$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <33F443AB.C26@hotmail.com> <5t1o62$n4e$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <33F58163.8E5@hotmail.com> <5t5fvi$9hd$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <33F84522.1BFA@hotmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 3673 Chris wrote: > > In a message which I read on alt.religion.bahai, Frederick Glaysher > wrote Osborn? wrote: > >> What??! First of all, I don't keep "documentation" on the > >> messages I've sent to this or that group, nor do I imagine do > >> 99+% of other Usenet users. I've enough to keep track of in > >> my studies, work, and family anyway. Second, though you > >> probably didn't intend it this way, by calling my statement > >> "dubious" you have gratuitously called into question my integrity > >> (no need to apologize, but please, Frederick, think about what > >> you are writing). > > fglaysher wrote: > >It seems doubtful, at best, to me.... Sorry if that hurts > >your feelings.... You provide no evidence that the messages > >that have been "lost" are non-controversial.... I know I > >have sent them controversial ones and that have conveniently > >been "lost." Others have said the same. > > Well, Fred, in my case the whole thing was chased through and five > messages were definitely NOT received. The sixth, sent via the e-mail > mirror, arrived and was immediately posted. As I started my > investigation with the moderators after two messages (or was it three) I > am more than happy to accept that, for some technical reason, the > messages just did not get through. Incidentally, they did not make it to > Deja News either, as far as I can ascertain. Demon Internet have not > managed to explain the fault so I assume that either there was a general > addressing problem or a problem in the BCCA's computer. I would say > that, over the last two years somewhere between a third to a half of the > messages I have sent to srb have not made it. Several times I chased up > the problem and was told they had not been received. Generally resending > the message got it posted and in only one case did I get back a > "rejection" which I was quite happy to accept as I had misread the > original message (though that was not the reason for the rejection). I realize this type of thing can happen and probably does happen occasionally with srb too. > > I'm afraid your continual carping about srb is getting me down to the > point that I am seriously thinking of giving up on arb which seems, > instead of being a Baha'i Newsgroup, to spend most its time discussing > your grievances and the claims of Joseph Emmanuael and, quite frankly, I > feel that you are overstating your case to the point of losing any > credibility. I and others have felt that our messages have been conveniently lost at times.... That's not overstating the case but merely stating it. Sorry if you don't like that. It seems to me you're making a blanket excuse for srb and are ignoring what appears to be another stratagem on their part to suppress anything they don't approve of. You may not agree, but that's the way I see it. Start a new thread if you don't like the present ones.... > > Chris Manvell, Isle of Skye, Scotland. Tel.:+44+(0)1471-822317 > -- > NEWSGROUP READERS: Please remove SPAMGUARD from address before e-mailing. > O SON OF MAN! I loved thy creation, hence I created thee. Wherefore, do > thou love Me, that I may name thy name and fill thy soul with the spirit > of life. (Baha'u'llah) > For more information go to , > or . -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Tue Sep 02 08:18:25 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Tue Sep 2 04:16:10 1997 Received: (qmail 26997 invoked from network); 2 Sep 1997 11:16:08 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.122) by hm3.hotmail.com with SMTP; 2 Sep 1997 11:16:08 -0000 Message-ID: <340BF5DA.4E9F@hotmail.com> Date: Tue, 02 Sep 1997 07:17:46 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc,news.admin.censorship,news.admin.net-abuse.misc,news.admi n.misc,soc.rights.human CC: FG@HOTMAIL.COM Subject: Re: Lost messages on SRB? (was Re: More ...) References: <1997Aug10.033218.10032@leo.vsla.edu> <5snmht$a5g$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <33F04F08.DFA@hotmail.com> <5svudh$8pc$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <33F443AB.C26@hotmail.com> <5t1o62$n4e$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <33F58163.8E5@hotmail.com> <5t5fvi$9hd$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <33F84522.1BFA@hotmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 2400 Chris wrote: > [clip] > > I'm afraid your continual carping about srb is getting me down to the > point that I am seriously thinking of giving up on arb which seems, > instead of being a Baha'i Newsgroup, to spend most its time discussing > your grievances and the claims of Joseph Emmanuael and, quite frankly, I > feel that you are overstating your case to the point of losing any > credibility. On further reflection, Chris, your using the word "carping" seems to imply to me that there is no substance to my and others' claims that srb is censoring content.... You are free to "give up on arb" if that's what you wish.... As you phrase it, though, you again take for yourself the high ground, unearned in my opinion since you and others consistently ignore the "SRB Censored" messages posted to arb.... You further attempt to dismiss my charges of censorship by referring to them pejoratively as "your grievances." As far as Joseph Emmanuael is concerned, though I don't read most of his messages or those responding to him, since I'm simply not interested in the subject, or find it credible, I do think he and those who are should be allowed to post to arb if they believe it's relevant to the Bahai Faith. My previous message responds to your allegation that I'm overstating my case. Let me add though that when you read the series of censored messages "SRB Censored" and seriously respond to them, or any of them, especially the recent ones and those suppressed by Samantha Smith last month wherein she censored someone else's message and then asked me to respond to the censored version, I'll be to concede that I'm "overstating" the case. > > Chris Manvell, Isle of Skye, Scotland. Tel.:+44+(0)1471-822317 > -- > NEWSGROUP READERS: Please remove SPAMGUARD from address before e-mailing. > O SON OF MAN! I loved thy creation, hence I created thee. Wherefore, do > thou love Me, that I may name thy name and fill thy soul with the spirit > of life. (Baha'u'llah) > For more information go to , > or . -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Sat Aug 16 07:59:15 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Sat Aug 16 03:31:22 1997 Received: (qmail 12642 invoked from network); 16 Aug 1997 10:31:20 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.117) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 16 Aug 1997 10:31:20 -0000 Message-ID: <33F581DE.57E5@hotmail.com> Date: Sat, 16 Aug 1997 06:33:02 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc,news.admin.censorship,news.admin.net-abuse.misc,news.admi n.misc CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Lost messages on SRB? (was Re: More ...) References: <1997Aug10.033218.10032@leo.vsla.edu> <5snmht$a5g$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <33F04F08.DFA@hotmail.com> <5svudh$8pc$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <33F443AB.C26@hotmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 1633 Chris wrote: > > In a message which I read on alt.religion.bahai, Frederick Glaysher > wrote > >The best explanation is what others have suggested: > >SRB is using the "overload" to suppress what it doesn't > >want to post.... > > > Actually, I am currently investigating the non-appearance of four posts > on s.r.b. So far I have actually managed to establish that, although > they were posted OK, not one of them reached its destination. Now, if I > was a bit paranoid about it, I would have been saying that my messages > were being censored. In practice they have been lost somewhere in the > system (possibly even in my own ISP's system). > > Just in case you think that they could possibly have been "censored", > they are not the type of message that would have been. Frankly, Chris, given your "orthodox" approach to everything, like Mr. Osborn's, I don't find your claim persuasive.... > > Chris Manvell, Isle of Skye, Scotland. Tel.:+44+(0)1471-822317 > -- > NEWSGROUP READERS: Please remove SPAMGUARD from address before e-mailing. > Verily, Jesus said: "Come ye after Me, and I will make you to become > fishers of men." In this day, however, We say: "Come ye after Me, that > We may make you to become quickeners of mankind." [Baha'u'llah] > For more info goto: > , or -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Mon Aug 18 10:19:20 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Mon Aug 18 05:53:27 1997 Received: (qmail 16264 invoked from network); 18 Aug 1997 12:53:25 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.121) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 18 Aug 1997 12:53:25 -0000 Message-ID: <33F84627.6478@hotmail.com> Date: Mon, 18 Aug 1997 08:55:03 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Lost messages on SRB? (was Re: More ...) References: <1997Aug10.033218.10032@leo.vsla.edu> <5snmht$a5g$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <33F04F08.DFA@hotmail.com> <5svudh$8pc$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> <33F443AB.C26@hotmail.com> <33F581DE.57E5@hotmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 2156 Chris wrote: > > In a message which I read on alt.religion.bahai, Frederick Glaysher > wrote > >> Just in case you think that they could possibly have been "censored", > >> they are not the type of message that would have been. > > > >Frankly, Chris, given your "orthodox" approach to everything, like > >Mr. Osborn's, I don't find your claim persuasive.... > > Fred, I resent very much your implication that I (and Donald, for that > matter) am an "orthodox" Baha'i. Are you implying that my posts are not > acceptable to s.r.b? Anyway, you know fine that you have no right to > brand me as "orthodox" as, a) as you do not even know me, other than > through my posts here none of which have, as far as I am aware, ever > expressed any "orthodox" view and, b) only the UHJ has the right to make > such an accusation publicly. If you wish to continue that charge, then > I suggest that you contact you ABM for Protection and ask them to persue > it, but to make unfounded allegations about my loyalty to the Covenant > on this group is beyond the pale. I meant orthodox in the proper everyday meaning of the word, not in regard to covenant breaking or whatever. Relax. > > For the record, and with assistance from one of the moderators, the > message was finally posted via bahai-faith@bcca.org, a route I was not > aware of. None of the messages sent direct were received and my IAP is > investigating why. > > Chris Manvell, Isle of Skye, Scotland. Tel.:+44+(0)1471-822317 > -- > NEWSGROUP READERS: Please remove SPAMGUARD from address before e-mailing. > Verily, Jesus said: "Come ye after Me, and I will make you to become > fishers of men." In this day, however, We say: "Come ye after Me, that > We may make you to become quickeners of mankind." [Baha'u'llah] > For more info goto: > , or -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Tue Aug 12 07:15:58 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Mon Aug 11 04:57:04 1997 Received: (qmail 12717 invoked from network); 11 Aug 1997 11:57:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.117) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 11 Aug 1997 11:57:02 -0000 Message-ID: <33EEFE72.3CCC@hotmail.com> Date: Mon, 11 Aug 1997 07:58:42 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc,soc.culture.iranian,soc.culture.israel,soc.rights.human CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: More SRBahai censorship (Re: Re Non-sense) References: <1997Aug10.033218.10032@leo.vsla.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 2426 K. Paul Johnson wrote: > > Chris writes: > > > > In a message which I read on alt.religion.bahai, Kavosh Soltani > > wrote > > >However, the problem I have with soc.culture.bahai is much more > > >fundamental! They refuse to post anything that questions Bahaism. > > > > Dear Kavosh, > > > > Either you have only looked at s.r.b (not s.c.b) very recently, or you > > have a short memory. Certainly in the last year or so there have been > > many posts from non-Baha'is questioning and challenging the claims of > > Baha'u'llah and of the Faith. It is very easy to dissimulate but it > > does not lie well on the shoulders of the followers of any religion. > > > Dear Chris, > > Ever since the creation of alt.religion.bahai, however, there > has been far less criticism and questioning on s.r.b. I had > two or three posts simply not appear, with no word from the > moderators. But later I did get a rejection notice from a > moderator for a post, so don't know what to make of it. > > However, when someone says critical posts have vanished without > word from the moderators, I know better than to call that > dissimulation. It's happened to me several times. It's happened to me SEVERAL times too now over the last month or two.... So much so, that I've started considering it another tactic on their part to censor what they don't wish to have see the light of day.... > > Cheers, > Paul Paul, I believe I read from you a message on soc.culture.iranian that referred to me as "unbalanced." It really hurt to read that but I must acknowledge that perhaps I might appear that way to others from time to time.... I do apologize if that's the impression you've received, and I do recognize I have said things occasionally I feel a little ashamed of afterwards.... In selfdefense, I suppose, I should say to someone who has not experienced the Bahai Faith from the inside some of my comments might appear to be extreme.... I do not believe that, by and large, they're inaccurate.... Really, all I'd like to see is a less oppressive and manipulative atmosphere in the Bahai Faith than exists. (Many others have acknowledged it exists other than I these past several months....) -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Wed Aug 20 07:55:56 1997 >From maryam@netlink.com.aunospam Tue Aug 19 07:49:01 1997 Received: from Anawave-Gravity.netlink.com.auNOSPAM (maryam@dlg15.netlink.com.au [203.16.172.145]) by netlink.com.au (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id BAA07918 for ; Wed, 20 Aug 1997 01:03:45 +1000 Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 00:49:16 +1000 From: maryam@netlink.com.auNOSPAM (Rachel) Subject: Re: Lost messages on SRB? (was Re: More ...) To: FG@hotmail.com Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <33F58163.8E5@hotmail.com> X-Mailer: Anawave Gravity v1.10 X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 9466 > > > > Frederick Glaysher wrote: > > >The best explanation is what others have suggested: > > >SRB is using the "overload" to suppress what it doesn't > > >want to post.... > > > > Then why have utterly uncontroversial (which is not to > > say uninteresting, of course :) ) messages not been > > posted? > > Dubious claim at best, unsupported by documentation.... > Especially in the light that others have stated messages > they construed as other than "uncontroversial" were > suppressed. > FYI I have had two posts lost. The first was regarding a recent teaching project (well when I say recent, we are talking Feb 1997) and it just outlined the wonderful teaching successes we had had with the Collis Featherstone Teaching Project. The second was a request for information regarding a prophecy regarding Kirman - if anyone knew whether it had come to pass. Both of these were so uncontroversial it is hard to imagine anything LESS controversial. I am attaching copies of these so that you can withdraw your statement that this is a dubious unsupported claim. Regards Rachel Butson =============== FIRST LOST POST =============== Dear Friends, I have just come back from four weeks of Baha'i bliss and just have an itch to tell you all about it. Named after the Hand of the Cause, Collis Featherstone, this teaching project has been going on around several sites in Australia; I was fortunate enough to be able to attend the Monash one (in Melbourne, Victoria). At first I was dragged kicking and screaming. "There is NO way you are going to get me to hand out flowers in a supermarket" I said as everyone around me wanted to know why I wasn't doing "a Collis"? (I should point out that the Monash project ran for 12 weeks in all, with 6 two-week intakes). Then one night, my mother brought home a dear friend of the family to convince me to support one of the firesides. Now I should tell you this was very brave of my mother. Normally my bedroom is not so clean, and it is the bane of my mother's life - there is no WAY she normally lets members of the general public up to see my room, especially when I am sitting in my pajamas, surfing the Internet. However on this night she did, and because this lady is a dear friend of the family, I couldn't say "no", even though I knew they would try and convince me to join an intake. So I went to the fireside. I had barely said hello to some friends, when one of the organisers came up to me and wanted to know if I would do an intake. Being the absolute chicken that I am, (I hate saying "no" to people) - I said "yes" and then spent the rest of the night wondering what I had got myself into. I hadn't realised the intake I had signed up for was in two days time, and that all the so-called work I was supposed to do was going to go down the drain. Oh well, Baha'u'llah does have a sense of humour. So I fronted up on the Saturday morning, sleeping bag in tow, to begin two days worth of spiritualisation. Things were starting to look better for some reason. The Baha'i Information centre (our base for spiritualisation, firesides, eating dinner etc.) was peaceful and there seemed a calm, detached air about the Project Manager - a wonderful newbie Baha'i from Texas. Then our local Auxiliary Board Member for Protection began the job of making 12 nervous, not-so-willing youth into vibrant, transformed, energised individuals. He did a pretty good job! Only took me an hour before I sat back and thought "This is good! Why was I so worried? But I am still NOT handing out flowers in a supermarket". We looked at what teaching the Faith means, WHY do we teach - I mean food for thought, "we must teach" rolls of our tongues so easily, but seriously, it is worthwhile to take a step back and examine what is our motivating force. It isn't a 'numbers' game - it is the fact that we have a precious jewel that we want to share. To bring another soul into communion with it's Creator - not a job to be laughed at. By this time, I had started to remember the names of the other 11 intake members, rolling my tongue around some pretty nifty Persian names and swapping Uni degrees (what exactly do "acturists" do again???). When the Project Manager's Assistant (who incidently is the 'acturist' - still haven't quite figured it out) asked me if I would be doing the next intake, I gave him the usual excuses - but he just looked at me, smiled, and said "Oh that's right, don't worry, forget I asked - I will speak to you at the end of this intake!". That was a bit forboding - he seemed so certain. Then on Monday we got down to work - and I can honestly say, I have never had such an experience. We would break up into teams - for me the most challenging aspect was volunteering in nursing homes. All of a sudden I was brought into contact with people at the end of their lives, mostly forgotten;the staff too overworked to be able to just "spend time". A half an hour's visit with these wonderful souls, just sitting and talking, or helping out with crossword puzzles, would make their week! It really made me think how we don't value our time enough. Especially in the west, I think, we run around trying to aquire material possessions, and yet the most valuable thing we have is our contact with each other. Getting assigned to letter-boxing was good - for about two hours walking around (please take into consideration that we were walking around in 40C degree heat - so two hours is a lot) we would get the rest of the afternoon off to do our washing, take a nap, plan our practical joke revenge on the boys' cabins. Dare I say detergent in the shampoo, missing sleeping bags and little connector pipes from cars removed. *sheepish grin* - for those interested in the result, the boys won! Then came the dreaded flower handing out. Oh man was I trying to avoid that like the plague. But I quickly found out, that if you tried to bribe, induce, or blackmail the Project Manager, it invariably got you assigned where you didn't want to go - so I was lumped on the Teaching team pretty quickly. But you know what - people would actually come up to us (we had a stand at a local mall) to find out who we are! The whole concept of "them coming to us" never occured to me. And when I did finally get up the gumption to hand out flowers, the look on the faces was worth it. Here we were, handing out something "for free" - with the simple goal of trying to make their day brighter! The other job was to actually look after the Information Centre. This was a place where anyone could come in for a cup of coffee, read about the Faith, chat with whomever was on duty. And I met some facinating people. People, I probably would never had had the chance to talk to before, strangers coming into contact - sharing their thoughts on life, the universe and everything! Much more than 42!!! (esoteric reference to Douglas Adam's Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy). Four weeks of service has given me so much more than I could ever hope to repay. I now have some very special brand new brothers and sisters (we missed each other so much after the end of the Project - we organised to go to the drive-in the very next day); a deeper understanding of what service really means; a vision of how teaching the Faith can re-energise and unite a community; and most of all - how much Baha'u'llah loves me, that He gave me the opportunity to experience the Collis Featherstone Teaching Project! Rachel ================ SECOND LOST POST ================ Allah'u'Abha friends, This request is from a friend of mine regarding a prophecy for Kirman in the Kitab-i-Aqdas (see the verse cited below). He wants to know whether the reference to the 'valourous men who render God victorious' has already happened or not; and if it has - what event is this referring to? If anyone knows - I would much appreciate your commentary (I haven't the foggiest myself). With much Baha'i love Rachel Verse in question: ============== O Land of Kaf and Ra!(1) We, verily, behold thee in a state displeasing unto God, and see proceeding from thee that which is inscrutable to anyone save Him, the Omniscient, the All-Informed; and We perceive that which secretly and stealthily diffuseth from thee. With Us is the knowledge of all things, inscribed in a lucid Tablet. Sorrow not for that which hath befallen thee. Erelong will God raise up within thee men endued with mighty valour, who will magnify My Name with such constancy that neither will they be deterred by the evil suggestions of the divines, nor will they be kept back by the insinuations of the sowers of doubt. With their own eyes will they behold God, and with their own lives will they render Him victorious. These, truly, are of those who are steadfast. (Baha'u'llah: The Kitab-i-Aqdas, pages 78-79) ********************************************** The Ancient Beauty hath consented to be bound with chains that mankind may be freed from its bondage ~Baha'u'llah~ ********************************************** Post from: maryam@netlink.com.auNOSPAM Homepage: https://www.netlink.com.au/~maryam From - Wed Aug 20 11:17:17 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Wed Aug 20 08:13:09 1997 Received: (qmail 7706 invoked from network); 20 Aug 1997 15:13:07 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.119) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 20 Aug 1997 15:13:07 -0000 Message-ID: <33FB09E3.B89@hotmail.com> Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 11:14:43 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: soc.religion.bahai CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Lost messages on SRB? (was Re: More ...) References: <"UbGPF.A.FEF.KQe-z"@bounty> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 1611 Rachel wrote: > > > > > > > Frederick Glaysher wrote: > > > >The best explanation is what others have suggested: > > > >SRB is using the "overload" to suppress what it doesn't > > > >want to post.... > > > > > > Then why have utterly uncontroversial (which is not to > > > say uninteresting, of course :) ) messages not been > > > posted? > > > > Dubious claim at best, unsupported by documentation.... > > Especially in the light that others have stated messages > > they construed as other than "uncontroversial" were > > suppressed. > > > > FYI I have had two posts lost. The first was regarding a recent teaching > project (well when I say recent, we are talking Feb 1997) and it just > outlined the wonderful teaching successes we had had with the Collis > Featherstone Teaching Project. The second was a request for information > regarding a prophecy regarding Kirman - if anyone knew whether it had > come to pass. > > Both of these were so uncontroversial it is hard to imagine anything LESS > controversial. I am attaching copies of these so that you can withdraw > your statement that this is a dubious unsupported claim. Meaningless, really.... That you say that that is your experience does not mean that it has been my experience or that of others.... > > Regards > Rachel Butson > > =============== > FIRST LOST POST > =============== > Dear Friends, [clip,clip] -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Wed Aug 20 11:17:15 1997 >From news@lacy.zippo.com Wed Aug 20 08:13:03 1997 Received: (from news@localhost) by lacy.zippo.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id IAA07127; Wed, 20 Aug 1997 08:13:01 -0700 (PDT) To: srb@bcca.org Path: newsp.zippo.com!news1 From: FG Newsgroups: soc.religion.bahai Subject: Re: Lost messages on SRB? (was Re: More ...) Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 11:14:43 -0400 Organization: None Lines: 49 Message-ID: <33FB09E3.B89@hotmail.com> References: <"UbGPF.A.FEF.KQe-z"@bounty> Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com NNTP-Posting-Host: glaysher@199.179.42.119 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) CC: FG@hotmail.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 1611 Rachel wrote: > > > > > > > Frederick Glaysher wrote: > > > >The best explanation is what others have suggested: > > > >SRB is using the "overload" to suppress what it doesn't > > > >want to post.... > > > > > > Then why have utterly uncontroversial (which is not to > > > say uninteresting, of course :) ) messages not been > > > posted? > > > > Dubious claim at best, unsupported by documentation.... > > Especially in the light that others have stated messages > > they construed as other than "uncontroversial" were > > suppressed. > > > > FYI I have had two posts lost. The first was regarding a recent teaching > project (well when I say recent, we are talking Feb 1997) and it just > outlined the wonderful teaching successes we had had with the Collis > Featherstone Teaching Project. The second was a request for information > regarding a prophecy regarding Kirman - if anyone knew whether it had > come to pass. > > Both of these were so uncontroversial it is hard to imagine anything LESS > controversial. I am attaching copies of these so that you can withdraw > your statement that this is a dubious unsupported claim. Meaningless, really.... That you say that that is your experience does not mean that it has been my experience or that of others.... > > Regards > Rachel Butson > > =============== > FIRST LOST POST > =============== > Dear Friends, [clip,clip] -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Thu Aug 21 08:43:07 1997 >From smsmith@cybertrails.com Wed Aug 20 11:25:58 1997 Received: from 6 ([205.180.50.87]) by cliff.cybertrails.com (Netscape Mail Server v2.02) with ESMTP id AAC131; Wed, 20 Aug 1997 11:20:12 -0700 From: smsmith@cybertrails.com (S. Michele Smith) To: Cc: "Baha'i SRB Moderators" Subject: Re: Lost messages on SRB? (was Re: More ...) Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 11:15:58 -0500 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <19970820182008762.AAC131@6> X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 2112 Dear Mr. Glaysher, Thank you for your submission to soc.religion.bahai. I am returning it to you unposted as further discussion on the subject of censorship has been discontinued for the time being. Thank you for your participation. Sincerely, S. Michele Smith co-moderator ---------- From: FG To: srb@bcca.org Cc: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Lost messages on SRB? (was Re: More ...) Date: Wednesday, August 20, 1997 10:14 AM Rachel wrote: > > > > > > > Frederick Glaysher wrote: > > > >The best explanation is what others have suggested: > > > >SRB is using the "overload" to suppress what it doesn't > > > >want to post.... > > > > > > Then why have utterly uncontroversial (which is not to > > > say uninteresting, of course :) ) messages not been > > > posted? > > > > Dubious claim at best, unsupported by documentation.... > > Especially in the light that others have stated messages > > they construed as other than "uncontroversial" were > > suppressed. > > > > FYI I have had two posts lost. The first was regarding a recent teaching > project (well when I say recent, we are talking Feb 1997) and it just > outlined the wonderful teaching successes we had had with the Collis > Featherstone Teaching Project. The second was a request for information > regarding a prophecy regarding Kirman - if anyone knew whether it had > come to pass. > > Both of these were so uncontroversial it is hard to imagine anything LESS > controversial. I am attaching copies of these so that you can withdraw > your statement that this is a dubious unsupported claim. Meaningless, really.... That you say that that is your experience does not mean that it has been my experience or that of others.... > > Regards > Rachel Butson > > =============== > FIRST LOST POST > =============== > Dear Friends, [clip,clip] -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Thu Aug 21 09:45:00 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Thu Aug 21 06:19:15 1997 Received: (qmail 16028 invoked from network); 21 Aug 1997 13:17:34 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.121) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 21 Aug 1997 13:17:34 -0000 Message-ID: <33FC4058.5936@hotmail.com> Date: Thu, 21 Aug 1997 09:19:20 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Rachel Subject: Re: Lost messages on SRB? (was Re: More ...) References: <"UbGPF.A.FEF.KQe-z"@bounty> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 9963 See followup on alt.religion.bahai since it has been censored by srb.... Rachel wrote: > > > > > > > Frederick Glaysher wrote: > > > >The best explanation is what others have suggested: > > > >SRB is using the "overload" to suppress what it doesn't > > > >want to post.... > > > > > > Then why have utterly uncontroversial (which is not to > > > say uninteresting, of course :) ) messages not been > > > posted? > > > > Dubious claim at best, unsupported by documentation.... > > Especially in the light that others have stated messages > > they construed as other than "uncontroversial" were > > suppressed. > > > > FYI I have had two posts lost. The first was regarding a recent teaching > project (well when I say recent, we are talking Feb 1997) and it just > outlined the wonderful teaching successes we had had with the Collis > Featherstone Teaching Project. The second was a request for information > regarding a prophecy regarding Kirman - if anyone knew whether it had > come to pass. > > Both of these were so uncontroversial it is hard to imagine anything LESS > controversial. I am attaching copies of these so that you can withdraw > your statement that this is a dubious unsupported claim. > > Regards > Rachel Butson > > =============== > FIRST LOST POST > =============== > Dear Friends, > > I have just come back from four weeks of Baha'i bliss and just have an > itch to tell you all about it. > > Named after the Hand of the Cause, Collis Featherstone, this teaching > project has been going on around several sites in Australia; I was > fortunate enough to be able to attend the Monash one (in Melbourne, > Victoria). > > At first I was dragged kicking and screaming. "There is NO way you are > going to get me to hand out flowers in a supermarket" I said as everyone > around me wanted to know why I wasn't doing "a Collis"? (I should point > out that the Monash project ran for 12 weeks in all, with 6 two-week > intakes). Then one night, my mother brought home a dear friend of the > family to convince me to support one of the firesides. Now I should tell > you this was very brave of my mother. Normally my bedroom is not so > clean, and it is the bane of my mother's life - there is no WAY she > normally lets members of the general public up to see my room, especially > when I am sitting in my pajamas, surfing the Internet. However on this > night she did, and because this lady is a dear friend of the family, I > couldn't say "no", even though I knew they would try and convince me to > join an intake. > > So I went to the fireside. I had barely said hello to some friends, when > one of the organisers came up to me and wanted to know if I would do an > intake. Being the absolute chicken that I am, (I hate saying "no" to > people) - I said "yes" and then spent the rest of the night wondering > what I had got myself into. I hadn't realised the intake I had signed up > for was in two days time, and that all the so-called work I was supposed > to do was going to go down the drain. Oh well, Baha'u'llah does have a > sense of humour. > > So I fronted up on the Saturday morning, sleeping bag in tow, to begin > two days worth of spiritualisation. Things were starting to look better > for some reason. The Baha'i Information centre (our base for > spiritualisation, firesides, eating dinner etc.) was peaceful and there > seemed a calm, detached air about the Project Manager - a wonderful > newbie Baha'i from Texas. Then our local Auxiliary Board Member for > Protection began the job of making 12 nervous, not-so-willing youth into > vibrant, transformed, energised individuals. He did a pretty good job! > Only took me an hour before I sat back and thought "This is good! Why > was I so worried? But I am still NOT handing out flowers in a > supermarket". > > We looked at what teaching the Faith means, WHY do we teach - I mean food > for thought, "we must teach" rolls of our tongues so easily, but > seriously, it is worthwhile to take a step back and examine what is our > motivating force. It isn't a 'numbers' game - it is the fact that we > have a precious jewel that we want to share. To bring another soul into > communion with it's Creator - not a job to be laughed at. > > By this time, I had started to remember the names of the other 11 intake > members, rolling my tongue around some pretty nifty Persian names and > swapping Uni degrees (what exactly do "acturists" do again???). When the > Project Manager's Assistant (who incidently is the 'acturist' - still > haven't quite figured it out) asked me if I would be doing the next > intake, I gave him the usual excuses - but he just looked at me, smiled, > and said "Oh that's right, don't worry, forget I asked - I will speak to > you at the end of this intake!". That was a bit forboding - he seemed so > certain. > > Then on Monday we got down to work - and I can honestly say, I have never > had such an experience. We would break up into teams - for me the most > challenging aspect was volunteering in nursing homes. All of a sudden I > was brought into contact with people at the end of their lives, mostly > forgotten;the staff too overworked to be able to just "spend time". A > half an hour's visit with these wonderful souls, just sitting and > talking, or helping out with crossword puzzles, would make their week! > It really made me think how we don't value our time enough. Especially > in the west, I think, we run around trying to aquire material > possessions, and yet the most valuable thing we have is our contact with > each other. > > Getting assigned to letter-boxing was good - for about two hours walking > around (please take into consideration that we were walking around in 40C > degree heat - so two hours is a lot) we would get the rest of the > afternoon off to do our washing, take a nap, plan our practical joke > revenge on the boys' cabins. Dare I say detergent in the shampoo, missing > sleeping bags and little connector pipes from cars removed. *sheepish > grin* - for those interested in the result, the boys won! > > Then came the dreaded flower handing out. Oh man was I trying to avoid > that like the plague. But I quickly found out, that if you tried to > bribe, induce, or blackmail the Project Manager, it invariably got you > assigned where you didn't want to go - so I was lumped on the Teaching > team pretty quickly. But you know what - people would actually come up > to us (we had a stand at a local mall) to find out who we are! The whole > concept of "them coming to us" never occured to me. And when I did > finally get up the gumption to hand out flowers, the look on the faces > was worth it. Here we were, handing out something "for free" - with the > simple goal of trying to make their day brighter! > > The other job was to actually look after the Information Centre. This > was a place where anyone could come in for a cup of coffee, read about > the Faith, chat with whomever was on duty. And I met some facinating > people. People, I probably would never had had the chance to talk to > before, strangers coming into contact - sharing their thoughts on life, > the universe and everything! Much more than 42!!! (esoteric reference to > Douglas Adam's Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy). > > Four weeks of service has given me so much more than I could ever hope to > repay. I now have some very special brand new brothers and sisters (we > missed each other so much after the end of the Project - we organised to > go to the drive-in the very next day); a deeper understanding of what > service really means; a vision of how teaching the Faith can re-energise > and unite a community; and most of all - how much Baha'u'llah loves me, > that He gave me the opportunity to experience the Collis Featherstone > Teaching Project! > > Rachel > > ================ > SECOND LOST POST > ================ > Allah'u'Abha friends, > > This request is from a friend of mine regarding a prophecy for Kirman in > the Kitab-i-Aqdas (see the verse cited below). He wants to know whether > the reference to the 'valourous men who render God victorious' has > already happened or not; and if it has - what event is this referring to? > > If anyone knows - I would much appreciate your commentary (I haven't the > foggiest myself). > > With much Baha'i love > Rachel > > Verse in question: > ============== > O Land of Kaf and Ra!(1) We, verily, behold thee in a state displeasing > unto God, and see proceeding from thee that which is inscrutable to > anyone save Him, the Omniscient, the All-Informed; and We perceive that > which secretly and stealthily diffuseth from thee. With Us is the > knowledge of all things, inscribed in a lucid Tablet. Sorrow not for > that which hath befallen thee. Erelong will God raise up within thee men > endued with mighty valour, who will magnify My Name with such constancy > that neither will they be deterred by the evil suggestions of the > divines, nor will they be kept back by the insinuations of the sowers of > doubt. With their own eyes will they behold God, and with their own > lives will they render Him victorious. These, truly, are of those who > are steadfast. > (Baha'u'llah: The Kitab-i-Aqdas, pages 78-79) > > ********************************************** > The Ancient Beauty hath consented to be bound > with chains that mankind may be freed from its > bondage ~Baha'u'llah~ > ********************************************** > Post from: maryam@netlink.com.auNOSPAM > Homepage: https://www.netlink.com.au/~maryam -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Thu May 22 06:12:59 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Wed May 21 05:38:35 1997 Received: (from root@localhost) by f10.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id FAA28355; Wed, 21 May 1997 05:38:34 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199705211238.FAA28355@f10.hotmail.com> Received: from 199.179.42.119 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Wed, 21 May 1997 05:38:32 PDT X-Originating-IP: [199.179.42.119] From: "Frederick Glaysher" To: FG@hotmail.com Subject: lowborn Content-Type: text/plain Date: Wed, 21 May 1997 05:38:32 PDT X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 4594 sborndo@pilot.msu.edu wrote: > > On Thu, 15 May 1997 06:01:10 -0600, FG@hotmail.com wrote: > > > In article <5lci4f$l5s$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu>, > > Donald Zhang Osborn wrote: > > > > On Sat, 26 Apr 1997 09:21:08 -0600 FG@hotmail.com wrote: > > > >Fare well, Donald. You've been an interesting voice, more > > > >intelligent than most Bahais who have participated.... > > > > > > Thank you for your conciliatory remarks, but even if I were > > > worthy of the compliment I cannot accept it as it puts others in > > > a negative light. This is a matter of principle about what I > > > have for some time referred to as a "gratuitous remark"-- i.e., > > > something which could just as easily not be said and leave every > > > one better off (e.g., if A says to B "You're doing a great job, > > > much better than C" the negative comparison to C is gratuitous: > > > 1) it does not help B, 2) it may hurt C when it gets back to > > > him/her, 3) if B accepts the remark uncritically, it could be a > > > source of misunderstanding with C, and 4) if B is perceptive, > > > he/she will realize that A could just as easily say the same sort > > > of thing about him/her to someone else later and therefore will > > > trust A less). Gratuitous remarks are not specifically > > > prohibited in the Baha'i Writings as far as I'm aware, but my > > > personal understanding is that they are against the spirit of the > > > teachings and thus try to avoid using them. > > > Shoghi Effendi refers to a non-Bahai someplace as a "low-born > > Christian woman." In the Priceless Pearl, Abdu'l-Baha is > > reported to have called passers-by in the street "gilded dirt." > > Are these gratuitous remarks? I've never said such things.... > Shoghi Effendi was referring to a woman married "under obscure > circumstances" by a Covenant breaker descended from Baha'u'llah. > You can find the reference by searching "lowborn" in the > writings of Shoghi Effendi at: > > https://sunsite.unc.edu/Bahai/TrueSeeker/ > > It does sound almost pejorative, but literally means "born in > low condition or rank." Therefore it could be read as > descriptive in this context. Reading it together with the > brief mention of the circumstances of the marriage, one might > also wonder if the Guardian is in this way avoiding saying > worse? Limp justification of a nasty, gratuitous, embittered remark.... It also reveals quite well, for lack of a better word, the "royalty" complex of some Iranians and the contempt of Islam for other religions that seems implicit at times.... > I didn't find the passage in which Abdu'l-Baha used the term > "gilded dirt," but it seems rather interesting. First of all, > we are referred to as "dust" or "clay" in several places in the > Writings--a reminder of our humble origins and the transience > of our existence. "Gilding" it reminds me of the French term, > "oignon dore" (gilded onion), meaning something rather > ridiculous--something commonplace given more importance than > it's worth. Without seeing the context, I would guess that > Abdu'l-Baha captured the essence of people, perhaps somewhat > self-importantly, too preoccupied with the vainglories of this > world to see the true purpose of this earthly existence. > Neither in my estimation qualifies as a "gratuitouss remark," > which is one category of utterance I'm still working on defining > which lies just "this side" of backbiting. Another is "white > backbiting" (or "backwhiting"?) where people may comment > negatively on others in context of consultation, but not in the > true spirit of consultation. There may be others. THe purpose > is educational--since the Baha'i Writings give so much attention > to the importance of words and qualities of utterance, it is > worthwhile, I think, to find ways of raising consciousness about > what kinds of speech are deleterious to social relations and > spiritual development. No, Frederick, not for censorship, but for refinement & enhancement of communication in a shrinking > world. > > Your remark was not so bad, but it was in my estimation, still > gratuitous: you do not have to mention the supposed lack of > a quality in one party(ies) to praise it in another(s). > > DZO > > Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Sun Jun 01 10:54:34 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Sun Jun 1 07:48:02 1997 Received: (qmail 4771 invoked from network); 1 Jun 1997 14:45:26 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.126) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 1 Jun 1997 14:45:26 -0000 Message-ID: <33918B52.51A0@hotmail.com> Date: Sun, 01 Jun 1997 10:46:42 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,misc.misc.talk.religion.misc CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: mailing list Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 2285 Pedro Macan=E1s Valverde wrote: > = > Here there is the most important condition to get the free mailing list= =2E > = > Mundivia offers for-nothing the Mailing-List Service. > The conditions for the creation of the mailing list are the next: > = > 0- The asker ( you ) must be Mundivia customs. > = > 1- All the list must be moderated by a responsable. > The server of the mailing list is in majordomo@ultra.mundivia.es y se > encuentra instalado en una estaci=A2n Ultra de SUN. > The list must hava an address like list_name@ultra.mundivia.es (i.e. > alt-bahai@ultra.mundivia.es ). > = > 5-The responsable of the list accept that Mundivia can include up to 1= 0 > publicity linews paid by the list sponsors. . The publicity will be > situated in the message and will be included automatically by the > mailinglist server. > = > 6- Mundivia can cancel the mailing list if it=B4s not oportuny moderate= d > by the responsable. > Here there is the most important condition to get the free mailing list= =2E > = > Mundivia offers for-nothing the Mailing-List Service. > The conditions for the creation of the mailing list are the next: > = > 0- The asker ( you ) must be Mundivia customs. > = > 1- All the list must be moderated by a person in carge. > The server of the mailing list is in majordomo@ultra.mundivia.es > The list must have an address like list_name@ultra.mundivia.es (i.e. > alt-bahai@ultra.mundivia.es ). > = > 5-The person in charge of the list accept that Mundivia can include up > to 10 publicity linews paid by the list sponsors. . The publicity will= > be situated in the message and will be included automatically by the > mailinglist server. > = > 6- Mundivia can cancel the mailing list if it=B4s not oportuny moderate= d > by the person in charge. > = > -- > Free translation of international pages/Traducci=F3n gratuita de p=E1gi= nas > internacionales > https://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acropolis/1091 Alt.religion.bahai can't have a moderated mailing list. That would defeat the whole purpose in setting itself up as an unmoderated group. Thanks, Pedro, for your help. I guess we'll just have to keep looking.... -- = Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Thu Jun 05 07:13:49 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Thu Jun 5 03:58:02 1997 Received: (qmail 18336 invoked from network); 5 Jun 1997 10:58:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.123) by hm2.hotmail.com with SMTP; 5 Jun 1997 10:58:00 -0000 Message-ID: <33969C02.3373@hotmail.com> Date: Thu, 05 Jun 1997 06:59:14 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,misc.misc.talk.religion.misc CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: mailing list References: <33918B52.51A0@hotmail.com> <3395d187.358408782@news.idt.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 1317 Andrea wrote: > > What if it was moderated, but the moderator just let all the messages > in, without reading them first perhaps ;). > You could moderate, if you had time...it would probably just consist > of posting out messages, since you obviously wouldn't be screening for > content ;) > -Andrea :) > aenglish@scnc.waverly.k12.mi.us I appreciate your vote of confidence, but what if I were a deceitful, dishonest liar who pretended to be posting everything while actually subtly tilting the postings along lines congruent with my own thinking? No, others might think that of me (already!).... So, it seems to me, in order to recover from the damage done by the NO votes, there has to be mailing list all sides can at least trust is not being manipulated by anyone.... > > On Sun, 01 Jun 1997 10:46:42 -0400, Frederick Glaysher > wrote: > > >Alt.religion.bahai can't have a moderated mailing list. That would > >defeat the whole purpose in setting itself up as an unmoderated group. > > > >Thanks, Pedro, for your help. I guess we'll just have to keep > >looking.... > > > >-- = > > > >Frederick Glaysher > >UseNet: alt.religion.bahai -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Sun Jun 01 09:55:18 1997 >From pmacvalverde@chusuk.arrakis.es Sat May 31 07:55:03 1997 Received: from ic-30.arrakis.es (ic-30.arrakis.es [195.5.72.30]) by landsraad.net (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id QAA11098 for ; Sat, 31 May 1997 16:51:23 +0200 (MET DST) X-Authentication-Warning: chusuk.arrakis.es: Host ic-30.arrakis.es [195.5.72.30] didn't use HELO protocol Message-ID: <338F6D1E.737C@pop.arrakis.es> Date: Sat, 31 May 1997 02:13:18 +0200 From: Pedro =?iso-8859-1?Q?Macan=E1s?= Valverde Reply-To: mac@royal.net X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win16; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Mailing list. Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 1844 Here there is the most important condition to get the free mailing list. Mundivia offers for-nothing the Mailing-List Service. The conditions for the creation of the mailing list are the next: 0- The asker ( you ) must be Mundivia customs. 1- All the list must be moderated by a responsable. The server of the mailing list is in majordomo@ultra.mundivia.es y se encuentra instalado en una estaci=A2n Ultra de SUN. The list must hava an address like list_name@ultra.mundivia.es (i.e. alt-bahai@ultra.mundivia.es ). 5-The responsable of the list accept that Mundivia can include up to 10 publicity linews paid by the list sponsors. . The publicity will be situated in the message and will be included automatically by the mailinglist server. 6- Mundivia can cancel the mailing list if it=B4s not oportuny moderated by the responsable. Here there is the most important condition to get the free mailing list. Mundivia offers for-nothing the Mailing-List Service. The conditions for the creation of the mailing list are the next: 0- The asker ( you ) must be Mundivia customs. 1- All the list must be moderated by a person in carge. The server of the mailing list is in majordomo@ultra.mundivia.es = The list must have an address like list_name@ultra.mundivia.es (i.e. alt-bahai@ultra.mundivia.es ). 5-The person in charge of the list accept that Mundivia can include up to 10 publicity linews paid by the list sponsors. . The publicity will be situated in the message and will be included automatically by the mailinglist server. 6- Mundivia can cancel the mailing list if it=B4s not oportuny moderated by the person in charge. -- = Free translation of international pages/Traducci=F3n gratuita de p=E1gina= s internacionales https://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acropolis/1091 From - Tue Jul 15 06:17:09 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Mon Jul 14 17:48:18 1997 Received: (qmail 20810 invoked from network); 15 Jul 1997 00:46:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.119) by hm3.hotmail.com with SMTP; 15 Jul 1997 00:46:10 -0000 Message-ID: <33CAC885.5588@hotmail.com> Date: Mon, 14 Jul 1997 20:47:01 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,TALK.RELIGION.MISC CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Maya Kaathryn Bohnhoff's original uncensored or self-censored message to me and srb Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 3029 Note she posted simultaneously to me and SRB, which then must have required her to censor several passages before posting it; SRB then absurdly requires ME to respond to the CENSORED version.... If this isn't unequivocal PROOF of censorship, I don't what it would be..... ----------- Subject: Re: Baha'i Arts Forum Date: Tue, 08 Jul 1997 10:39:56 -0700 From: Maya Kaathryn Bohnhoff Organization: SFWA To: FG@hotmail.com Newsgroups: soc.religion.bahai References: 1 Frederick Glaysher wrote: > There is no art allowed in the Bahai Faith.... only propaganda.... > what passes for "art" is really only the crudest banalities > permitted.... > > -- > Frederick Glaysher > UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Freddie, As a musician and a writer, I must take exception to your diatribe. The Faith has done nothing but free me as an artist rather than circumscribe. It has allowed me to approach old subjects with new viewpoint and vigor and has brought a passion to my work that often surprises even me. While I have had individual Baha'is tell me that my rock oriented music wasn't Baha'i or that one shouldn't sing of Baha'u'llah in the terms one usually reserves for a lover, or that the characters in my stories shouldn't use profanity because Baha'is shouldn't use profanity, I am bright enough to understand that those were individual opinions, like yours, and are not expressive of Baha'i doctrine. Besides, we all know what they say about opinions, don't we? Like certain anatomical features, everybody has one. Abdu'l-Baha says our thought is our reality. Your thought and your reality are apparently very bitter. You have my sympathy. But don't thrust your reality at me and expect me to accept it as mine or accept it without argument. Indeed, I have to ask why you find it necessary to impose your anger and angst on others at all. The art that comes out of true faith is not propaganda, but an exploration of possibilities. I will explore the possibilities for myself and mankind in general as my faith dictates and neither you, with your cynical bluster, nor those who kindly offer the opinion that there is a "form" for Baha'i art will stop that exploration. BTW, I supppose it's too much to hope that you found it significant that your mean-spirited comment was actually published on this supposedly censored newsgroup. +----------------------------------------+ | Maya Kaathryn Bohnhoff syntax@oro.net | +----------------------------------------+ | "Nothing have I seen but that I | | perceived God within it, God before it,| | and God after it." - the Imam Husayn | +----------------------------------------+ -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com, or ask your ISP to add it. From - Tue Sep 02 08:18:10 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Sun Aug 31 13:07:34 1997 Received: (qmail 24074 invoked from network); 31 Aug 1997 20:07:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.127) by hm3.hotmail.com with SMTP; 31 Aug 1997 20:07:31 -0000 Message-ID: <3409CF5D.3E50@hotmail.com> Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 16:09:01 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,misc.misc,talk.religion.misc CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Michael McKenny's expulsion from Baha'i Faith References: <34051fd3.1133761@snews.zippo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 1931 Chris wrote: [clip] > > However, the nub of it is that if someone makes public statements, or > makes statements to the House that indicate that he is not, after all, a > Baha'i, then the response would be to tell that person that, no, they > are not a Baha'i. In this case it appears as if the person thought they > were a Baha'i but that after writng to the House they proved otherwise. > So maybe it is not so much expelling someone as telling them that what > they believe does not accord with Baha'i beliefs, ipso facto they are > not a Baha'i. This seems to be the sense of the situation as I understand it too though I know very little of the real facts involved.... There's a fine passage by Baha'u'llah on pantheism, or Neo-paganism, if you will, but he obviously alludes to it as a stage of humankind's spiritual evolution.... I too have stood in the woods on a glorious summer day or in a winter storm and felt a seemingly divine presence in the trees.... Many souls have.... though bashful to say so.... That's different from taking orders of some sort.... Druidic? Alas, in some ways, I found him a kindred soul.... though there appears to have been much of which I know nothing.... > We will never know all the facts of this case and anything less than all > the facts is idle speculation. He seems not reluctant to share them with others. > And, no, I do not find it scary. I see it as the natural outcome of a > series of communications about the beliefs of an individual. So do I. It's unreasonable to wish to belong to Christianity or Islam (though Abdu'l-Baha did) and still be considered a Bahai.... Illogical, if nothing else. > > Chris Manvell, Isle of Skye, Scotland. Tel.:+44+(0)1471-822317 -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Wed Sep 03 08:44:32 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Wed Sep 3 04:43:53 1997 Received: (qmail 5044 invoked from network); 3 Sep 1997 11:43:31 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.124) by hm2.hotmail.com with SMTP; 3 Sep 1997 11:43:31 -0000 Message-ID: <340D4DC1.3DCD@hotmail.com> Date: Wed, 03 Sep 1997 07:45:05 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,misc.misc,talk.religion.misc,news.admin.censorship,news.admin.misc CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Michael McKenny's expulsion from Baha'i Faith References: <3409CF5D.3E50@hotmail.com> <1997Sep2.150738.29735@leo.vsla.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 4005 K. Paul Johnson wrote: > > Frederick Glaysher writes: > > Chris wrote: > > > > > > However, the nub of it is that if someone makes public statements, or > > > makes statements to the House that indicate that he is not, after all, a > > > Baha'i, then the response would be to tell that person that, no, they > > > are not a Baha'i. > > And if a person makes voluminous statements that indicate to > everyone concerned who has read them that he *is* a Baha'i, a > rather "true believerish" type of Baha'i at that... then what? > Everyone on Talisman was shocked by the expulsion because > McKenny had been so consistent in his support of the Covenant > and the Central Figures, etc. I personally never saw any message posted by him on Talisman or elsewhere that would have led me to think he'd ever be expelled from the Bahai Faith though I've been exiled from Talisman since last December.... Actually, I never knew it was possible to be "expelled" from the Bahai Faith.... Something new, it seems.... > > In this case it appears as if the person thought they > > > were a Baha'i but that after writng to the House they proved otherwise. > > After 25 years or so of being accepted as a Baha'i in good > standing. Then expressing sentiments that seem too "liberal" > about things like women serving in a future House, or > interpreting infallibility in a broader way, cause this person > to get targeted as a problem by Haifa, and then declared a > non-Baha'i. I don't know exactly what the problem issues were. Are you sure you identify the right ones here? I was under the impression that he converted to neo-paganism.... Is that incorrect? > > > > So maybe it is not so much expelling someone as telling them that what > > > they believe does not accord with Baha'i beliefs, ipso facto they are > > > not a Baha'i. > > It's creating a new litmus test of unquestioning support not > merely for the authority of the House but the theological views > of its members. I'd need more accurate details to know for sure. The idea, as you present it, is not an appealing one.... > > > > > We will never know all the facts of this case and anything less than all > > > the facts is idle speculation. > > > > He seems not reluctant to share them with others. > > Right, and "idle speculation in the absence of all the facts" > is an excuse to ignore tyranny. I'm not the author of "idle speculation" and wouldn't ignore tyranny if that's what I thought it was.... But I'm not sure that it was.... If he truly joined a neo-pagan persuasion, shall I say, then, I support the decision of the Universal House of Justice, if that's the basis of its judgment that he's simple no longer a Bahai.... It would then seem to me an obvious and inevitable conclusion. > > > > > And, no, I do not find it scary. I see it as the natural outcome of a > > > series of communications about the beliefs of an individual. > > They were not at all natural. The House never told McKenny > *which* beliefs he stated made him a non- Baha'i! Nor did they > answer his pleas for explanation at all. Nor did the Canadian > NSA, simply reasserting the expulsion. I don't know any of the details along these lines. If the process was as you say, I could not support such procedure.... Have these things been verified in some way? > > > > So do I. It's unreasonable to wish to belong to Christianity > > or Islam (though Abdu'l-Baha did) and still be considered > > a Bahai.... Illogical, if nothing else. > > McKenny did not maintain dual membership or wish to SFAIK. > What's your point? "SFAIK": Acronyms these days are too much for me.... What's that supposed to mean? I was under the impression that he had dual membership in a neo-pagan order of some sort.... -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Sun Sep 07 07:41:33 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Fri Sep 5 03:36:46 1997 Received: (qmail 13293 invoked from network); 5 Sep 1997 10:36:34 -0000 Received: from ts?rh.metronet.lib.mi.us (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.20) by hm3.hotmail.com with SMTP; 5 Sep 1997 10:36:34 -0000 Message-ID: <340FE10B.2F24@hotmail.com> Date: Fri, 05 Sep 1997 06:38:03 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,misc.misc,talk.religion.misc,news.admin.censorship,news.admin.misc CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Michael McKenny's expulsion from Baha'i Faith References: <340D4DC1.3DCD@hotmail.com> <1997Sep4.192048.7953@leo.vsla.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 2500 K. Paul Johnson wrote: > > Frederick Glaysher writes: > > > > I personally never saw any message posted by him on Talisman > > or elsewhere that would have led me to think he'd ever be > > expelled from the Bahai Faith though I've been exiled from > > Talisman since last December.... Actually, I never knew it > > was possible to be "expelled" from the Bahai Faith.... > > Something new, it seems.... > > > Yes, it is new. There have been "cleanings up" of membership > lists, but never anyone declared a non-Baha'i after many years > of being accepted as one. Particularly galling is that he was > not told *why* he was considered not to be a Baha'i. > snip > > > > I don't know exactly what the problem issues were. Are you > > sure you identify the right ones here? I was under the > > impression that he converted to neo-paganism.... Is that > > incorrect? > > *After* his expulsion from Baha'i ranks he joined a neo-pagan > group where he had some friends. Not before. Mike himself > doesn't know exactly what the problem issues were, because > neither the House nor the NSA will pinpoint anything more > specific than "your behavior"-- *WHAT* behavior? They won't > even tell him what he'd have to do to be reinstated!!!!! > > > > not sure that it was.... If he truly joined a neo-pagan > > persuasion, shall I say, then, I support the decision of > > the Universal House of Justice, if that's the basis of its > > judgment that he's simple no longer a Bahai.... It would > > then seem to me an obvious and inevitable conclusion. > > > That's putting the cart before the horse. Yes, it's speculating.... I thought he had stated he was exploring elsewhere before hearing from the UHJ.... > > > > I don't know any of the details along these lines. If the > > process was as you say, I could not support such procedure.... > > Have these things been verified in some way? > > > He has posted his correspondence to and from the House and the > NSA. Where? Surely not on soc.religion.bahai!!! > > > > "SFAIK": Acronyms these days are too much for me.... > > What's that supposed to mean? I was under the impression > > that he had dual membership in a neo-pagan order of some > > sort.... > > > So far as I know. And no, he had no dual membership. > > Cheers, > Paul -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Wed Sep 03 08:44:37 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Wed Sep 3 05:19:53 1997 Received: (qmail 11900 invoked from network); 3 Sep 1997 12:19:51 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.124) by hm3.hotmail.com with SMTP; 3 Sep 1997 12:19:51 -0000 Message-ID: <340D5651.32E0@hotmail.com> Date: Wed, 03 Sep 1997 08:21:37 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,misc.misc,talk.religion.misc,news.admin.censorship,news.admin.misc CC: FG@hotmail.com, talisman@umich.edu Subject: Re: Michael McKenny's expulsion from Baha'i Faith References: <3409CF5D.3E50@hotmail.com> <1997Sep2.150738.29735@leo.vsla.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 648 K. Paul Johnson wrote: > Everyone on Talisman was shocked by the expulsion because > McKenny had been so consistent in his support of the Covenant > and the Central Figures, etc. I don't know why anyone on Talisman should be shocked.... If it's true, as you explain the situation, it's no different from their dictatorially throwing me off Talisman last December.... And then barring me from returning this summer after having served my unjust sentence of six-months of exile.... -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Wed Sep 03 17:28:15 1997 >From burlb@bmi.net Wed Sep 3 08:42:10 1997 Received: from burlbare(src addr [208.131.38.124]) (1569 bytes) by ns.bmi.net via sendmail with P\:smtp/R:inet_hosts/T:smtp (sender: ) id for ; Wed, 3 Sep 1997 08:44:14 -0700 (PDT) (Smail-3.2.0.96 1997-Jun-2 #19 built 1997-Jun-30) Message-Id: <3.0.1.32.19970903084227.00c859b4@mail.bmi.net> X-Sender: burlb@mail.bmi.net X-Mailer: Windows Eudora Pro Version 3.0.1 (32) Date: Wed, 03 Sep 1997 08:42:27 -0700 To: FG@hotmail.com From: Burl Barer Subject: Re: Michael McKenny's expulsion from Baha'i Faith In-Reply-To: <340D5651.32E0@hotmail.com> References: <3409CF5D.3E50@hotmail.com> <1997Sep2.150738.29735@leo.vsla.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 970 >I don't know why anyone on Talisman should be shocked.... No one was shocked by Mr. McKenny's personal beliefs being outside the Baha'i Faith He was not kicked off Talisman. In fact, he's the new Talisman poster child. Talisman thrives on promulgating stories of censorship and oppression although no one has censored Mr. McKenney nor oppressed him in any way. Really, Frederick, the key to getting on Talisman and not getting kicked off is, I think, to promise to only accuse the Universal House of Justice of misdeeds, not the list owners nor fellow subscribers. :-) ****************************************************************** THE SAINT by Burl Barer is on sale NOW worldwide! Visit Burl at https://www.bmi.net/burlb also enjoy https://www.saint.org For a spiritual experience, click this: https://www.bahai.org and the ever popular https://www.pagecreator.com/~newsroom ******************************************************************** From - Wed Sep 03 17:28:17 1997 >From pierceed@sswdserver.sswd.csus.edu Wed Sep 3 11:11:26 1997 Received: from sswdserver.sswd.csus.edu (sswdserver.sswd.csus.edu [130.86.182.240]) by csus.edu with SMTP id LAA18255; Wed, 3 Sep 1997 11:09:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: from DSS_486/MAILQUEUE by sswdserver.sswd.csus.edu (Mercury 1.13); Wed, 3 Sep 97 11:09:41 -800 Received: from MAILQUEUE by DSS_486 (Mercury 1.13); Wed, 3 Sep 97 11:09:30 -800 From: "Eric D. Pierce" To: Frederick Glaysher Date: Wed, 3 Sep 1997 11:09:24 PST8PDT MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT Subject: Re: Michael McKenny's expulsion from Baha'i Faith Reply-to: pierceed@csus.edu CC: talisman@umich.edu Priority: normal X-mailer: Pegasus Mail v3.40 Message-ID: <509A263246A@sswdserver.sswd.csus.edu> X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 1359 Hi Fred, I hope all is well with you and your family. McKinney was expelled from the Baha'i Faith, not from the talisman email list. There was a conversation among several talisman members about having you come back on board, but the list owner apparently declined our suggestions about how to try to make it work. EP On 3 Sep 97 at 8:21, Frederick Glaysher wrote: > Date sent: Wed, 03 Sep 1997 08:21:37 -0400 > From: FG > Send reply to: FG@hotmail.com > Copies to: FG@hotmail.com, talisman@umich.edu > Subject: Re: Michael McKenny's expulsion from Baha'i Faith > K. Paul Johnson wrote: > > > Everyone on Talisman was shocked by the expulsion because > > McKenny had been so consistent in his support of the Covenant > > and the Central Figures, etc. > > I don't know why anyone on Talisman should be shocked.... > If it's true, as you explain the situation, it's no different > from their dictatorially throwing me off Talisman last December.... > And then barring me from returning this summer after having served > my unjust sentence of six-months of exile.... > > -- > Frederick Glaysher > UseNet: alt.religion.bahai > Ask your ISP to add it; also available on > www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. > From - Thu May 22 19:34:22 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Thu May 22 13:43:59 1997 Received: (qmail 1793 invoked from network); 21 May 1997 11:36:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.119) by hm2.hotmail.com with SMTP; 21 May 1997 11:36:32 -0000 Message-ID: <3382DE89.A87@hotmail.com> Date: Wed, 21 May 1997 07:37:46 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc,soc.rights.human Subject: Re: Moderation and liberty, was Re: Shiite Interpretations of the Bahai Faith -- IS LIBERTY AN EVIL? References: <5lk775$9n5$1@bilbo.reference.com> <5lklbp$eqt@sjx-ixn10.ix.netcom.com> <33807fc5.235138856@news.wwnet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 1748 Roger Reini wrote: > > Newsgroups trimmed -- soc.culture.iranian removed > > On 17 May 1997 16:11:37 GMT, attila1@ix.netcom.com(Libertarius) wrote: > > [ongoing discussion about liberty snipped] > [clip] > We've seen aspects of this already with the threats to the > environment, the various weapons that man has developed and used, etc. > > > This passage merely proves how religions and pseudo-religious > > ideologies like Fascism, Communism, Socialism, etc., > > can be used for the purpose of depriving individuals of their > > most fundamental possessions: their inherent rights to life, > > liberty, and the persuit of happiness, > > Any religion which does any of these things is not a true religion, > IMHO. It has lost the divine spirit that once animated and has become > harmful and pernicious. It has fallen under the spell of men who > would use it for their corrupt purposes. > > > and their right and duty > > to rid themselves of any governments that are inimical to these > > rights! > It seems to me the Bahai Faith is dangerously close to becoming exactly such a religion.... The American Bahai, for instance, failed to report properly what occurred in the Bahai community some years ago when it was disbanded by the NSA, routinely fails to report on such instances as a treasurer in St. Louis running off with $10,000 of believers' contributions, or personnel in Wilmette stealing mailed-in contributions, etc.... There are many other such incidents. Perhaps some known only to you, given the tight control over information.... [clip] > Roger (rreini@wwnet.com) > https://www.wwnet.com/~rreini/ -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Fri May 23 07:48:35 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Fri May 23 04:21:04 1997 Received: (qmail 15829 invoked from network); 23 May 1997 11:21:03 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.122) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 23 May 1997 11:21:03 -0000 Message-ID: <33857DEA.7476@hotmail.com> Date: Fri, 23 May 1997 07:22:18 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,misc.misc,talk.religion.misc,soc.rights.human,soc.culture.israel,soc.culture.irania n CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Moderation and liberty, was Re: Shiite Interpretations of the Bahai Faith -- IS LIBERTY AN EVIL? References: <5lk775$9n5$1@bilbo.reference.com> <5lklbp$eqt@sjx-ixn10.ix.netcom.com> <33807fc5.235138856@news.wwnet.com> <19970522162414.8131.qmail@nym.alias.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 3316 Notarius wrote: > > Roger Reini wrote: > >> Any religion which does any of these things is not a true > >religion, > >> IMHO. It has lost the divine spirit that once animated and has > >become > >> harmful and pernicious. It has fallen under the spell of men who > >> would use it for their corrupt purposes. > > Libertarius wrote: > >> > and their right and duty > >> > to rid themselves of any governments that are inimical to > >these > >> > rights! > >> > > > > Frederick wrote: > >It seems to me the Bahai Faith is dangerously close to becoming > >exactly such a religion.... The American Bahai, for instance, failed > >to report properly what occurred in the Bahai community some years > >ago when it was disbanded by the NSA, routinely fails to report on > >such instances as a treasurer in St. Louis running off with $10,000 > >of believers' contributions, or personnel in Wilmette stealing > >mailed-in contributions, etc.... There are many other such > >incidents. > >Perhaps some known only to you, given the tight control over > >information.... > > Hello, > I have never heard of these things before. > This place (I call it Buchara), is a little offroad. > I knew things were bad, but not that bad. > Please give us more details, Frederick. These are grave accusations. > I believe you, but please back it up, if possible. > > I want to remind everybody that an LSA, an NSA and also the UHJ are > elected institutions. > If the representatives fail to perform they should be replaced. > > If Frederick is correct, and I have no reason to doubt him, > a big can of worms has just been opened. > Was anyone brought to court? I doubt it. I do know security cameras were installed in Wilmette for surveillance of the workers opening letters of contribution.... > > I remember a Persian, who felt lonely. He had a relationship with a woman, > promising her marriage later. > When the time came he went back to Iran, > got married and came back with his wife. > The woman complained to the NSA, but the thing was hushed up. I've known the same thing to happen though the Iranian returned to another country.... A nice American shiksa is difficult to deny oneself, especially when one's "prominent" daddy, advice giver to.... well, use your imagination.... > This didnt happen in the US. > Under the law of the land the woman could not refuse to press charges, > but she could remain silent. > If anyone else had reported the incident, she would have been called > to testify, the man would have been sent to prison and exiled. > The NSA, in fact, gave her no justice at all. > She left the Faith. > She eventually started talking. She had been wronged and rightfully complained. As Shakespeare put it, "man shall have his mare." > > Justice is important in the Writings. > Cover-ups cannot be hidden in the long run. Controlling all mediums of communication and information, though, helps.... In the end they accumulate > and become visible. > This places the responsibility on the mass of the believers. > After all, they have the power of the vote. > No use to overthrow a government with violence, > if it can be done with the vote, is there? -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Thu May 22 06:12:54 1997 >From panuser@reference.com Tue May 20 03:25:02 1997 Received: (from panuser@localhost) by shadowfax.reference.com (8.8.5/8.8.4) id DAA05259; Tue, 20 May 1997 03:24:49 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 20 May 1997 03:24:49 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199705201024.DAA05259@shadowfax.reference.com> From: FG@hotmail.com Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc,soc.culture.iranian Cc: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Shiite Interpretations of the Bahai Faith -- IS LIBERTY AN EVIL? References: <5lk775$9n5$1@bilbo.reference.com> <5lklbp$eqt@sjx-ixn10.ix.netcom.com> Organization: Reference.Com Posting Service X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 2188 On Mon, 19 May 1997 22:26:24 +0100, Chris wrote: > Hi Libertarius, long time no see. > > Putting aside all thoughts of religion and just addressing your > comments. I'm not sure quite how serious you are being here and if I > misinterpret you, please forgive me. > > In a message which I read on alt.religion.bahai, Libertarius > wrote [clip] > > And, that, I feel, is the rub. I see nor reason why I should not follow > the laws of my Faith provided they do not harm you, either as an > individual or in the society you live in. And similarly, I do not seek > to impose any restriction on your pursuit of happiness, provided that it > in no way harms others. Where things go wrong are when one group of > individuals seeks to impose its "laws" on others -- to their detriment. How do you feel about a group of Bahais imposing their "laws" on others, Bahais and non-Bahais? That's exactly what happened when 600+ fanatical Bahais distorted the voting process for talk.religion.bahai.... That's okay...? We don't know what their true motives were...? We can't be sure...? [clip] But one thing that horrifies > me more than anything else is the thought of a bunch of religious > fanatics (not your average church goer here) aquiring power and forcing > their beliefs on a yeilding nation, through fear or whatever. There you > and I see exactly eye to eye. What's to prevent the same oppression demonstrated in the voting for talk.religion.bahai from being turned on a "yielding nation"? Or a cadre of fanatics in a local Bahai community from imposing their extremist will on other Bahais and non-Bahais? > > All the best, > ________________________________________________________________________ > Chris Manvell, Isle of Skye, Scotland. Tel.:+44+(0)1471-822317 Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai -- Posted using Reference.COM https://www.reference.com Browse, Search and Post Usenet and Mailing list Archive and Catalog. InReference, Inc. accepts no responsibility for the content of this posting. From - Thu May 22 06:12:55 1997 >From panuser@reference.com Tue May 20 03:25:51 1997 Received: (from panuser@localhost) by shadowfax.reference.com (8.8.5/8.8.4) id DAA05389; Tue, 20 May 1997 03:25:38 -0700 (PDT) Date: Tue, 20 May 1997 03:25:38 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199705201025.DAA05389@shadowfax.reference.com> From: FG@hotmail.com Newsgroups: soc.rights.human,soc.culture.iranian Cc: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Shiite Interpretations of the Bahai Faith -- IS LIBERTY AN EVIL? References: <5lk775$9n5$1@bilbo.reference.com> <5lklbp$eqt@sjx-ixn10.ix.netcom.com> Organization: Reference.Com Posting Service X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 2188 On Mon, 19 May 1997 22:26:24 +0100, Chris wrote: > Hi Libertarius, long time no see. > > Putting aside all thoughts of religion and just addressing your > comments. I'm not sure quite how serious you are being here and if I > misinterpret you, please forgive me. > > In a message which I read on alt.religion.bahai, Libertarius > wrote [clip] > > And, that, I feel, is the rub. I see nor reason why I should not follow > the laws of my Faith provided they do not harm you, either as an > individual or in the society you live in. And similarly, I do not seek > to impose any restriction on your pursuit of happiness, provided that it > in no way harms others. Where things go wrong are when one group of > individuals seeks to impose its "laws" on others -- to their detriment. How do you feel about a group of Bahais imposing their "laws" on others, Bahais and non-Bahais? That's exactly what happened when 600+ fanatical Bahais distorted the voting process for talk.religion.bahai.... That's okay...? We don't know what their true motives were...? We can't be sure...? [clip] But one thing that horrifies > me more than anything else is the thought of a bunch of religious > fanatics (not your average church goer here) aquiring power and forcing > their beliefs on a yeilding nation, through fear or whatever. There you > and I see exactly eye to eye. What's to prevent the same oppression demonstrated in the voting for talk.religion.bahai from being turned on a "yielding nation"? Or a cadre of fanatics in a local Bahai community from imposing their extremist will on other Bahais and non-Bahais? > > All the best, > ________________________________________________________________________ > Chris Manvell, Isle of Skye, Scotland. Tel.:+44+(0)1471-822317 Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai -- Posted using Reference.COM https://www.reference.com Browse, Search and Post Usenet and Mailing list Archive and Catalog. InReference, Inc. accepts no responsibility for the content of this posting. From - Thu May 22 19:34:18 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Thu May 22 13:43:59 1997 Received: (qmail 1803 invoked from network); 21 May 1997 11:48:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.119) by hm2.hotmail.com with SMTP; 21 May 1997 11:48:10 -0000 Message-ID: <3382E144.5709@hotmail.com> Date: Wed, 21 May 1997 07:49:24 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.bahai,soc.rights.human CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Shiite Interpretations of the Bahai Faith -- IS LIBERTY AN EVIL? References: <5lk775$9n5$1@bilbo.reference.com> <5lklbp$eqt@sjx-ixn10.ix.netcom.com> <5lru5o$kfl$1@bilbo.reference.com> <5lsobc$i1j@drn.zippo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 3077 sam wrote: > > In article <5lru5o$kfl$1@bilbo.reference.com>, FG@hotmail.com says... > > > >On Mon, 19 May 1997 22:26:24 +0100, Chris wrote: > > >> > >> And, that, I feel, is the rub. I see nor reason why I should not follow > >> the laws of my Faith provided they do not harm you, either as an > >> individual or in the society you live in. And similarly, I do not seek > >> to impose any restriction on your pursuit of happiness, provided that it > >> in no way harms others. Where things go wrong are when one group of > >> individuals seeks to impose its "laws" on others -- to their detriment. > > > >How do you feel about a group of Bahais imposing their "laws" on > >others, Bahais and non-Bahais? That's exactly what happened when > >600+ fanatical Bahais distorted the voting process for > >talk.religion.bahai.... That's okay...? We don't know what their > >true motives were...? We can't be sure...? > > > > Since when has any Baha'i held a gun to your head to force you into doing > something you don't think is right, Fred? Just because a great many people > don't agree with some of your views, that doesn't necessarily mean you're > being imposed upon. More like a coercive psychological gun.... I and 156 other people were deprived of talk.religion.bahai.... That's a fact witnessed here by any fair-minded person who has cared enough to watch, in broad daylight, if you will.... Not to mention censored by Detweiler and others at soc.religion.bahai.... I invite anyone so interested to go back in the files and read the messages "SRB censored 4-?-97" and so on.... Decide for yourself.... > > By the way, everybody - Fred is distorting an unfortunate occurrence. The sad > fact is that many people voted certain ways without complete knowledge of the > facts or issues at hand. I personally talked to many Baha'is who voted on > talk.religion.bahai, and MANY of them did not have all the information, and > said they would have probably abstained if they had known. So, rather than > continually complain about this, Fred, I would suggest you lick your wounds, > so to speak, and try again in another couple months. > > >[clip] > > > > But one thing that horrifies > >> me more than anything else is the thought of a bunch of religious > >> fanatics (not your average church goer here) aquiring power and forcing > >> their beliefs on a yeilding nation, through fear or whatever. There you > >> and I see exactly eye to eye. > > > >What's to prevent the same oppression demonstrated in the voting > >for talk.religion.bahai from being turned on a "yielding > >nation"? Or a cadre of fanatics in a local Bahai community from > >imposing their extremist will on other Bahais and non-Bahais? > > > > *yawn* Poor, put upon Fred. Your cute insults do not gainsay the oppression you're trying to make excuses for.... Nor does your suggestion here that it's just me.... > > sammmm -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Thu May 22 19:34:49 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Thu May 22 13:56:11 1997 Received: (qmail 6054 invoked from network); 22 May 1997 11:16:13 -0000 Received: from ts?rh.metronet.lib.mi.us (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.20) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 22 May 1997 11:16:13 -0000 Message-ID: <33842B47.3570@hotmail.com> Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 07:17:28 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc,soc.rights.human CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Shiite Interpretations of the Bahai Faith -- IS LIBERTY AN EVIL? References: <5lk775$9n5$1@bilbo.reference.com> <5lklbp$eqt@sjx-ixn10.ix.netcom.com> <5lru5o$kfl$1@bilbo.reference.com> <5lsobc$i1j@drn.zippo.com> <3382E144.5709@hotmail.com> <5lvd5k$t27@drn.zippo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 4346 sam wrote: > > In article <3382E144.5709@hotmail.com>, Frederick says... > > > >sam wrote: > >> > >> In article <5lru5o$kfl$1@bilbo.reference.com>, FG@hotmail.com says... > >> > > >> >How do you feel about a group of Bahais imposing their "laws" on > >> >others, Bahais and non-Bahais? That's exactly what happened when > >> >600+ fanatical Bahais distorted the voting process for > >> >talk.religion.bahai.... That's okay...? We don't know what their > >> >true motives were...? We can't be sure...? > >> > > >> > >> Since when has any Baha'i held a gun to your head to force you into doing > >> something you don't think is right, Fred? Just because a great many people > >> don't agree with some of your views, that doesn't necessarily mean you're > >> being imposed upon. > > > >More like a coercive psychological gun.... I and 156 other people were > >deprived of talk.religion.bahai.... That's a fact witnessed here by any > >fair-minded person who has cared enough to watch, in broad daylight, if > >you will.... Not to mention censored by Detweiler and others at > >soc.religion.bahai.... I invite anyone so interested to go back in the > >files and read the messages "SRB censored 4-?-97" and so on.... > >Decide for yourself.... > > > > You have been deprived for six months. Deal with it. Quit bitching, and try > again. You think that newsgroup is the only one to have had this happen to > it? Think again! Does alt.music.white-power ring a bell? Never heard of it. And I certainly would not have voted for it, nor against it.... > > You weren't censored. You were prevented from speaking in certain areas that > had a specific charter, which you decided to ignore. And this was not on all > postings, it was on those that went beyond the level of reason. Is it the > charter you have something against, or the particular moderators who made these > decisions? If it's the moderators, you still have yet to show that their > decisions were blatantly at odds with the charter. If it's the charter - well, > sorry, bub, that's the rules. Are you the Sam in New Zeeland? You sound like him.... > > I've read the messages. So have many others. I guess the people that don't > believe the exact same way you do on this subject aren't being "fair-minded". > > >> > >> By the way, everybody - Fred is distorting an unfortunate occurrence. The sad > >> fact is that many people voted certain ways without complete knowledge of the > >> facts or issues at hand. I personally talked to many Baha'is who voted on > >> talk.religion.bahai, and MANY of them did not have all the information, and > >> said they would have probably abstained if they had known. So, rather than > >> continually complain about this, Fred, I would suggest you lick your wounds, > >> so to speak, and try again in another couple months. > >> > > What, no comment on this? I still have yet to see you admit (or show proof to > the contrary) that not all of the 600+ votes were informed "attacks" on you > and your views on free speech. OHHH.... THEY weren't "informed"? Detweiler and others posted detailed instructions on soc.religion.bahai and elsewhere.... There are no excuses though you and others have strained every muscle to make them ever since the voted was announced March 26th.... > > >> >[clip] > >> >What's to prevent the same oppression demonstrated in the voting > >> >for talk.religion.bahai from being turned on a "yielding > >> >nation"? Or a cadre of fanatics in a local Bahai community from > >> >imposing their extremist will on other Bahais and non-Bahais? > >> > > >> > >> *yawn* Poor, put upon Fred. > > > >Your cute insults do not gainsay the oppression you're trying to > >make excuses for.... Nor does your suggestion here that it's just > >me.... > > > > Your whining and finger pointing doesn't help anybody either. And I never > said it was just you, although I can see how you could interpret that from > the above. You should realize that as long as you address people in a > vituperative manner, the number of people that listen to you will be very few > in number. Especially if the 691 fanatics have anything to say about it.... > > sam! -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Fri May 23 07:48:33 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Fri May 23 04:11:48 1997 Received: (qmail 7205 invoked from network); 23 May 1997 11:11:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.122) by hm2.hotmail.com with SMTP; 23 May 1997 11:11:47 -0000 Message-ID: <33857BBE.1901@hotmail.com> Date: Fri, 23 May 1997 07:13:02 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,misc.misc,talk.religion.misc CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Shiite Interpretations of the Bahai Faith -- IS LIBERTY AN EVIL? References: <5lk775$9n5$1@bilbo.reference.com> <5lklbp$eqt@sjx-ixn10.ix.netcom.com> <5lru5o$kfl$1@bilbo.reference.com> <5lsobc$i1j@drn.zippo.com> <3382E144.5709@hotmail.com> <5lvd5k$t27@drn.zippo.com> <33842B47.3570@hotmail.com> <5m2g4c$7i4@drn.zippo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 3301 sam wrote: > > In article <33842B47.3570@hotmail.com>, Frederick says... > > > >sam wrote: [clip] > >>> By the way, everybody - Fred is distorting an unfortunate occurrence. The sad > >>> fact is that many people voted certain ways without complete knowledge of the > >>> facts or issues at hand. I personally talked to many Baha'is who voted on > >>> talk.religion.bahai, and MANY of them did not have all the information, and > >>> said they would have probably abstained if they had known. So, rather than > >>> continually complain about this, Fred, I would suggest you lick your wounds, > >>> so to speak, and try again in another couple months. > >> > >> What, no comment on this? I still have yet to see you admit (or show proof to > >> the contrary) that not all of the 600+ votes were informed "attacks" on you > >> and your views on free speech. > > > >OHHH.... THEY weren't "informed"? Detweiler and others posted detailed > >instructions on soc.religion.bahai and elsewhere.... There are no > >excuses though you and others have strained every muscle to make them > >ever since the voted was announced March 26th.... > > > > And you know for a fact that each and every one of these 691 "fanatics" (to use > your unfounded label, which, by the way, is backbiting on these individuals) > regularly frequent soc.religion.bahai and "elsewhere"? > > Okay, sure: They *were* informed. But were they informed COMPLETELY and > ACCURATELY? If you say yes, you will be lying, even to yourself, because even > YOU have used the argument that these people did not know all the details. > If they *did* know all of the details, you can't use the argument that this > person or that person solicited for votes, because IT WOULDN'T HAVE MATTERED! > And I seem to remember *you* pushing people in certain directions as well... Sophistry, in my opinion.... > > It may be an excuse, but hey, guess what? It's the TRUTH! > > >> >Your cute insults do not gainsay the oppression you're trying to > >> >make excuses for.... Nor does your suggestion here that it's just > >> >me.... > >> > > >> > >> Your whining and finger pointing doesn't help anybody either. And I never > >> said it was just you, although I can see how you could interpret that from > >> the above. You should realize that as long as you address people in a > >> vituperative manner, the number of people that listen to you will be very few > >> in number. > > > >Especially if the 691 fanatics have anything to say about it.... > > > > It's really sad that you are *so* out of touch with reality. And it's also > sad that you'd prefer to build obstacles between yourself and others that don't > recite YOUR "party line" than try to communicate and SOLVE the issues you (and > others) may have. By polarizing "you" and "them", you're pushing people > into choosing sides. And you think most people are going to choose you over > the unity of the Faith? At least the unity of the Faith, while it may have > problems and continue to have problems, is sanctioned and blessed by > Baha'u'llah. Any bets on which will last longer? God bless you, sam, I know you think you mean well.... > > sam... -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Thu May 22 19:34:32 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Thu May 22 13:47:04 1997 Received: (qmail 2283 invoked from network); 21 May 1997 11:55:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.119) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 21 May 1997 11:55:18 -0000 Message-ID: <3382E2E6.4533@hotmail.com> Date: Wed, 21 May 1997 07:56:22 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc,soc.culture.iranian,soc.rights.human CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Shiite Interpretations of the Bahai Faith -- IS LIBERTY AN EVIL? References: <5lk775$9n5$1@bilbo.reference.com> <5lklbp$eqt@sjx-ixn10.ix.netcom.com> <5lru5o$kfl$1@bilbo.reference.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 2613 Chris wrote: > > In a message which I read on alt.religion.bahai, FG@hotmail.com > wrote > >How do you feel about a group of Bahais imposing their "laws" on > >others, Bahais and non-Bahais? That's exactly what happened when > >600+ fanatical Bahais distorted the voting process for > >talk.religion.bahai.... That's okay...? We don't know what their > >true motives were...? We can't be sure...? > > That was not the imposition of Baha'i laws, that was the imposition of > the feelings of 600+ individuals (some of whom were not Baha'is). That > does not make it right but, also, it does not refelct the Baha'i Faith, > or at least not as I know it here in the UK -- maybe it is different in > the US. I believe it definitely does reflect how many Bahais think and act.... Maybe it's the same but you're failing to see it.... > > > But one thing that horrifies > >> me more than anything else is the thought of a bunch of religious > >> fanatics (not your average church goer here) aquiring power and forcing > >> their beliefs on a yeilding nation, through fear or whatever. There you > >> and I see exactly eye to eye. > > > >What's to prevent the same oppression demonstrated in the voting > >for talk.religion.bahai from being turned on a "yielding > >nation"? Or a cadre of fanatics in a local Bahai community from > >imposing their extremist will on other Bahais and non-Bahais? > > Hopefully, an increasing maturation of the body of the believers and the > institutions of the Faith. I does happen, and I know it happens. Often > it is because of the small communities we still have but as the Faith > grows and develops and as the Baha'is deepen their understanding of the > role of those who elect the institutions (i.e. all of us) so we will get > better institutions. At the moment, too much of the disintegrating > culture around us pervades our beloved Faith. This "increasing maturation," of course, is always the excuse or the hope.... There has to come a time, individually and collectively, when the question is asked, "Has something gone wrong?" Your acknowledgement that it does and has happened is a rare piece of honesty for a fellow Bahai, I must add.... Always blaming the surrounding culture for everything and postponing Nirvana to the glorious future gets tiresome too.... > > All the best Fred, and keep posting, > ________________________________________________________________________ > Chris Manvell, Isle of Skye, Scotland. Tel.:+44+(0)1471-822317 Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Thu May 22 06:13:02 1997 >From sheev@geocities.com Wed May 21 20:44:33 1997 Received: from Sophie (ouppp146.modems.ou.edu [129.15.92.146]) by geocities.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) with SMTP id UAA12690 for ; Wed, 21 May 1997 20:41:29 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <3383C1F6.32FB@geocities.com> Date: Wed, 21 May 1997 22:48:06 -0500 From: Smurfy Organization: The Beautiful People X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc,soc.culture.iranian,soc.rights.human To: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Shiite Interpretations of the Bahai Faith -- IS LIBERTY AN EVIL? References: <5lk775$9n5$1@bilbo.reference.com> <5lklbp$eqt@sjx-ixn10.ix.netcom.com> <5lru5o$kfl$1@bilbo.reference.com> <3382E2E6.4533@hotmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 585 what is a bahai?? -- ======================================= the ultimately superior smurf ======================================= s h e e v @ g e o c i t i e s . c o m ======================================= IF U HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD TO MY SIG, E-MAIL ME. ======================================= All the school kids so sick of books They like the punk and the metal band When the buzzer rings They're walking like an Egyptian ======================================= Flying Toasters really make the bread turn brown. ======================================= From - Thu May 22 19:34:24 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Thu May 22 13:44:43 1997 Received: (qmail 4055 invoked from network); 22 May 1997 11:19:28 -0000 Received: from ts?rh.metronet.lib.mi.us (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.20) by hm2.hotmail.com with SMTP; 22 May 1997 11:19:28 -0000 Message-ID: <33842C0B.2478@hotmail.com> Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 07:20:43 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc,soc.culture.iranian,soc.rights.human To: Smurfy Subject: Re: Shiite Interpretations of the Bahai Faith -- IS LIBERTY AN EVIL? References: <5lk775$9n5$1@bilbo.reference.com> <5lklbp$eqt@sjx-ixn10.ix.netcom.com> <5lru5o$kfl$1@bilbo.reference.com> <3382E2E6.4533@hotmail.com> <3383C1F6.32FB@geocities.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 241 Smurfy wrote: > > what is a bahai?? A member of the Bahai Faith. For more info see soc.religion.bahai. They post a monthly resources list and outline that you might find helpful. -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Thu May 22 19:34:55 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Thu May 22 13:53:53 1997 Received: (qmail 6087 invoked from network); 22 May 1997 11:24:52 -0000 Received: from ts?rh.metronet.lib.mi.us (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.20) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 22 May 1997 11:24:52 -0000 Message-ID: <33842D4E.7FF@hotmail.com> Date: Thu, 22 May 1997 07:26:06 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,misc.misc,talk.religion.misc,soc.culture.iranian CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Shiite Interpretations of the Bahai Faith -- IS LIBERTY AN EVIL? References: <5lk775$9n5$1@bilbo.reference.com>, <5lklbp$eqt@sjx-ixn10.ix.netcom.com>, , <5lru5o$kfl$1@bilbo.reference.com> <19970521222344.8780.qmail@nym.alias.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 2628 Notarius wrote: > > Hi Chris, > > you wrote: > > >That was not the imposition of Baha'i laws, that was the imposition > >of the feelings of 600+ individuals (some of whom were not > >Baha'is). That does not make it right but, also, it does not > >refelct the Baha'i Faith, or at least not as I know it here in the > >UK -- maybe it is different in the US. > > You are right. I read it as if the Faith does not sanction > the censorship attempt. > In that case we are defending the Faith against a massive onslaught > of ignorance and intolerance. > This shunned newsgroup is doing something right. > > You are in Scotland, arent you? Chances are that you have a working community > there. I have seen working communities in at least two European countries. > They were located far from the big cities. > Most of the members were born in the country. > IMHO, that was the key to their success. > > I think Frederick has been a bahai for a long time. > And I am still influenced by what I saw in 1973 and earlier. > Think about it. 1973! > Problems at that time were not discussed when they should have been. > They were not discussed in 1979 or 1985. > If they had been discussed and acted upon we wouldnt have had to fight > for the creation of this newsgroup. > > Thanks to the efforts of one man a university was opened up. > Something great was about to happen. The new converts took part > in international conferences, led research and regularly popped up on TV. > But there was a clash of sorts between the freedom of the academic mind > and a rigid interpretation of the Writings. > Or maybe it was only a rigid habit, I dont know. > Only one of them is still active. > This happened at a time when the doors were wide open. > I could see 20-30 new faces every time we had a fireside at the Bahai Center. > What would have happened if the intellectuals had been free to do what they > wanted? > They would have created international networks,written books and articles. > They would probably have started their own magazine. > They would certainly have provided an alternative > to the Shiite interpretations. > The children of their children and the children of the people they brought > to the Faith would now be continuing the work. > I hope I am not overdoing it. I get carried away sometimes. > All this happened long ago in a country far away..... Tell us where, if you would or can.... The same thing has happened here.... There are several individuals who might come to mind here in the US.... -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Fri Jul 18 07:46:10 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Fri Jul 18 04:31:32 1997 Received: (qmail 3278 invoked from network); 18 Jul 1997 11:31:30 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.117) by hm3.hotmail.com with SMTP; 18 Jul 1997 11:31:30 -0000 Message-ID: <33CF546F.216D@hotmail.com> Date: Fri, 18 Jul 1997 07:33:03 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Moderation in speech References: <33bcedcc.28631898@news.wwnet.com> <5qlgus$hh6$2@msunews.cl.msu.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 1844 Donald Zhang Osborn wrote: > > rreini@wwnet.com (Roger Reini) wrote: > >From the writings of Baha'u'llah: > > > >Say: Human utterance is an essence which aspireth to exert its > >influence and needeth moderation. As to its influence, this is > >conditional upon refinement which in turn is dependent upon hearts > >which are detached and pure. As to its moderation, this hath to be > >combined with tact and wisdom as prescribed in the Holy Scriptures and > >Tablets. Meditate upon that which hath streamed forth from the heaven > >of the Will of thy Lord, He Who is the Source of all grace, that thou > >mayest grasp the intended meaning which is enshrined in the sacred > >depths of the Holy Writings. > >(Baha'u'llah: Tablets of Baha'u'llah, page 143) > > Thanks for posting this. I find it interesting that Baha'u'llah repeats > this exact same lesson three times in different contexts in different > tablets. I don't have time to look them up but anyone interested can do > a search at https://sunsite.unc.edu/Bahai/TrueSeeker/ > > In no other religious scriptures, to my knowledge, has such an emphasis > been placed on speech and communication, as well as its relation to purity > of heart. As the world "shrinks" and as media such as the Usenet permit > direct communication among widely dispersed people, human society IMHO > needs such guidance on refinement of utterance. "Refinement of utterance": In my opinion, you and many other Bahais abuse this type of comment by Baha'u'llah to justify censorship and spiritual and intellectual witch hunts.... silencing opinions other than what you imagine is "orthodox" Bahai opinion. > > DZO -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com, or ask your ISP to add it. From - Fri Jul 11 06:44:55 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Thu Jul 10 04:14:40 1997 Received: (qmail 16093 invoked from network); 10 Jul 1997 11:14:39 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.118) by hm3.hotmail.com with SMTP; 10 Jul 1997 11:14:39 -0000 Message-ID: <33C4C47A.7806@hotmail.com> Date: Thu, 10 Jul 1997 07:16:10 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: More Bahai "art" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 3033 Maya Kaathryn Bohnhoff wrote: > > Frederick Glaysher wrote: > > > There is no art allowed in the Bahai Faith.... only propaganda.... > > what passes for "art" is really only the crudest banalities > > permitted.... > > > > -- > > Frederick Glaysher > > UseNet: alt.religion.bahai > > Freddie, > As a musician and a writer, I must take exception to your > diatribe. > > The Faith has done nothing but free me as an artist rather > than circumscribe. It has allowed me to approach old > subjects with new viewpoint and vigor and has brought a > passion to my work that often surprises even me. > > While I have had individual Baha'is tell me that my rock oriented > music wasn't Baha'i or that one shouldn't sing of Baha'u'llah > in the terms one usually reserves for a lover, or that the > characters in my stories shouldn't use profanity because > Baha'is shouldn't use profanity, I am bright enough to understand > that those were individual opinions, like yours, and are not > expressive of Baha'i doctrine. Besides, we all know what they > say about opinions, don't we? Like certain anatomical > features, everybody has one. > > Abdu'l-Baha says our thought is our reality. Your thought and > your reality are apparently very bitter. You have my sympathy. > But don't thrust your reality at me and expect me to accept it > as mine or accept it without argument. Indeed, I have to ask why > you find it necessary to impose your anger and angst on others > at all. The idea that our thought is our reality is a very old one, preceding Abdu'l-Baha by several centuries at least.... Found, for instance, in medieval Xian theology.... It's precisely this idea that concerns me. Your characterization of my "reality" is unfortunately colored by your own.... I certainly neither expect you nor anyone else to accept anything "without argument" or the free assent of your own conscience.... > > The art that comes out of true faith is not propaganda, but an > exploration of possibilities. I will explore the possibilities > for myself and mankind in general as my faith dictates and > neither you, with your cynical bluster, nor those who kindly > offer the opinion that there is a "form" for Baha'i art > will stop that exploration. You're not as "free" in your exploration as you imagine.... > > BTW, I supppose it's too much to hope that you found it significant > that your mean-spirited comment was actually published on this > supposedly censored newsgroup. (soc.religion.bahai) which has yet to publish either.... > > +----------------------------------------+ > | Maya Kaathryn Bohnhoff syntax@oro.net | > +----------------------------------------+ > | "Nothing have I seen but that I | > | perceived God within it, God before it,| > | and God after it." - the Imam Husayn | > +----------------------------------------+ -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Fri Jul 11 06:45:09 1997 >From smsmith@cybertrails.com Fri Jul 11 00:22:13 1997 Received: from 6 ([205.180.50.89]) by cliff.cybertrails.com (Netscape Mail Server v2.02) with ESMTP id AAA162; Thu, 10 Jul 1997 23:33:35 -0700 From: smsmith@cybertrails.com (S. Michele Smith) To: Cc: "Baha'i SRB Moderators" Subject: Re: More Bahai "art" Date: Thu, 10 Jul 1997 23:39:27 -0500 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-ID: <19970711063334417.AAA162@6> X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 3674 Dear Mr. Glaysher, Thank you for your submission to soc.religion.bahai. However, it is being returned to you unposted as it is obviously a response to a private message, the entire contents of which were not posted to this newsgroup. In future, if you would take the time to read what is and is not posted to the newsgroup and respond accordingly, it would be appreciated. Sincerely, S. Michele Smith, co-moderator soc.religion.bahai srb-mods@bcca.org ---------- From: FG To: srb@bcca.org Cc: FG@hotmail.com Subject: More Bahai "art" Date: Thursday, July 10, 1997 6:17 AM Maya Kaathryn Bohnhoff wrote: > > Frederick Glaysher wrote: > > > There is no art allowed in the Bahai Faith.... only propaganda.... > > what passes for "art" is really only the crudest banalities > > permitted.... > > > > -- > > Frederick Glaysher > > UseNet: alt.religion.bahai > > Freddie, > As a musician and a writer, I must take exception to your > diatribe. > > The Faith has done nothing but free me as an artist rather > than circumscribe. It has allowed me to approach old > subjects with new viewpoint and vigor and has brought a > passion to my work that often surprises even me. > > While I have had individual Baha'is tell me that my rock oriented > music wasn't Baha'i or that one shouldn't sing of Baha'u'llah > in the terms one usually reserves for a lover, or that the > characters in my stories shouldn't use profanity because > Baha'is shouldn't use profanity, I am bright enough to understand > that those were individual opinions, like yours, and are not > expressive of Baha'i doctrine. Besides, we all know what they > say about opinions, don't we? Like certain anatomical > features, everybody has one. > > Abdu'l-Baha says our thought is our reality. Your thought and > your reality are apparently very bitter. You have my sympathy. > But don't thrust your reality at me and expect me to accept it > as mine or accept it without argument. Indeed, I have to ask why > you find it necessary to impose your anger and angst on others > at all. The idea that our thought is our reality is a very old one, preceding Abdu'l-Baha by several centuries at least.... Found, for instance, in medieval Xian theology.... It's precisely this idea that concerns me. Your characterization of my "reality" is unfortunately colored by your own.... I certainly neither expect you nor anyone else to accept anything "without argument" or the free assent of your own conscience.... > > The art that comes out of true faith is not propaganda, but an > exploration of possibilities. I will explore the possibilities > for myself and mankind in general as my faith dictates and > neither you, with your cynical bluster, nor those who kindly > offer the opinion that there is a "form" for Baha'i art > will stop that exploration. You're not as "free" in your exploration as you imagine.... > > BTW, I supppose it's too much to hope that you found it significant > that your mean-spirited comment was actually published on this > supposedly censored newsgroup. (soc.religion.bahai) which has yet to publish either.... > > +----------------------------------------+ > | Maya Kaathryn Bohnhoff syntax@oro.net | > +----------------------------------------+ > | "Nothing have I seen but that I | > | perceived God within it, God before it,| > | and God after it." - the Imam Husayn | > +----------------------------------------+ -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Fri Jul 11 06:44:57 1997 >From news@lacy.zippo.com Thu Jul 10 04:15:41 1997 Received: (from news@localhost) by lacy.zippo.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id EAA23241; Thu, 10 Jul 1997 04:15:39 -0700 (PDT) To: srb@bcca.org Path: newsp.zippo.com!news1 From: FG Newsgroups: soc.religion.bahai Subject: More Bahai "art" Date: Thu, 10 Jul 1997 07:17:12 -0400 Organization: None Lines: 79 Message-ID: <33C4C4B8.3FD2@hotmail.com> Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com NNTP-Posting-Host: glaysher@199.179.42.118 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) CC: FG@hotmail.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 3033 Maya Kaathryn Bohnhoff wrote: > > Frederick Glaysher wrote: > > > There is no art allowed in the Bahai Faith.... only propaganda.... > > what passes for "art" is really only the crudest banalities > > permitted.... > > > > -- > > Frederick Glaysher > > UseNet: alt.religion.bahai > > Freddie, > As a musician and a writer, I must take exception to your > diatribe. > > The Faith has done nothing but free me as an artist rather > than circumscribe. It has allowed me to approach old > subjects with new viewpoint and vigor and has brought a > passion to my work that often surprises even me. > > While I have had individual Baha'is tell me that my rock oriented > music wasn't Baha'i or that one shouldn't sing of Baha'u'llah > in the terms one usually reserves for a lover, or that the > characters in my stories shouldn't use profanity because > Baha'is shouldn't use profanity, I am bright enough to understand > that those were individual opinions, like yours, and are not > expressive of Baha'i doctrine. Besides, we all know what they > say about opinions, don't we? Like certain anatomical > features, everybody has one. > > Abdu'l-Baha says our thought is our reality. Your thought and > your reality are apparently very bitter. You have my sympathy. > But don't thrust your reality at me and expect me to accept it > as mine or accept it without argument. Indeed, I have to ask why > you find it necessary to impose your anger and angst on others > at all. The idea that our thought is our reality is a very old one, preceding Abdu'l-Baha by several centuries at least.... Found, for instance, in medieval Xian theology.... It's precisely this idea that concerns me. Your characterization of my "reality" is unfortunately colored by your own.... I certainly neither expect you nor anyone else to accept anything "without argument" or the free assent of your own conscience.... > > The art that comes out of true faith is not propaganda, but an > exploration of possibilities. I will explore the possibilities > for myself and mankind in general as my faith dictates and > neither you, with your cynical bluster, nor those who kindly > offer the opinion that there is a "form" for Baha'i art > will stop that exploration. You're not as "free" in your exploration as you imagine.... > > BTW, I supppose it's too much to hope that you found it significant > that your mean-spirited comment was actually published on this > supposedly censored newsgroup. (soc.religion.bahai) which has yet to publish either.... > > +----------------------------------------+ > | Maya Kaathryn Bohnhoff syntax@oro.net | > +----------------------------------------+ > | "Nothing have I seen but that I | > | perceived God within it, God before it,| > | and God after it." - the Imam Husayn | > +----------------------------------------+ -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Fri Jul 11 06:44:59 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Thu Jul 10 04:15:43 1997 Received: (qmail 16102 invoked from network); 10 Jul 1997 11:15:41 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.118) by hm3.hotmail.com with SMTP; 10 Jul 1997 11:15:41 -0000 Message-ID: <33C4C4B8.3FD2@hotmail.com> Date: Thu, 10 Jul 1997 07:17:12 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: soc.religion.bahai CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: More Bahai "art" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 3033 Maya Kaathryn Bohnhoff wrote: > > Frederick Glaysher wrote: > > > There is no art allowed in the Bahai Faith.... only propaganda.... > > what passes for "art" is really only the crudest banalities > > permitted.... > > > > -- > > Frederick Glaysher > > UseNet: alt.religion.bahai > > Freddie, > As a musician and a writer, I must take exception to your > diatribe. > > The Faith has done nothing but free me as an artist rather > than circumscribe. It has allowed me to approach old > subjects with new viewpoint and vigor and has brought a > passion to my work that often surprises even me. > > While I have had individual Baha'is tell me that my rock oriented > music wasn't Baha'i or that one shouldn't sing of Baha'u'llah > in the terms one usually reserves for a lover, or that the > characters in my stories shouldn't use profanity because > Baha'is shouldn't use profanity, I am bright enough to understand > that those were individual opinions, like yours, and are not > expressive of Baha'i doctrine. Besides, we all know what they > say about opinions, don't we? Like certain anatomical > features, everybody has one. > > Abdu'l-Baha says our thought is our reality. Your thought and > your reality are apparently very bitter. You have my sympathy. > But don't thrust your reality at me and expect me to accept it > as mine or accept it without argument. Indeed, I have to ask why > you find it necessary to impose your anger and angst on others > at all. The idea that our thought is our reality is a very old one, preceding Abdu'l-Baha by several centuries at least.... Found, for instance, in medieval Xian theology.... It's precisely this idea that concerns me. Your characterization of my "reality" is unfortunately colored by your own.... I certainly neither expect you nor anyone else to accept anything "without argument" or the free assent of your own conscience.... > > The art that comes out of true faith is not propaganda, but an > exploration of possibilities. I will explore the possibilities > for myself and mankind in general as my faith dictates and > neither you, with your cynical bluster, nor those who kindly > offer the opinion that there is a "form" for Baha'i art > will stop that exploration. You're not as "free" in your exploration as you imagine.... > > BTW, I supppose it's too much to hope that you found it significant > that your mean-spirited comment was actually published on this > supposedly censored newsgroup. (soc.religion.bahai) which has yet to publish either.... > > +----------------------------------------+ > | Maya Kaathryn Bohnhoff syntax@oro.net | > +----------------------------------------+ > | "Nothing have I seen but that I | > | perceived God within it, God before it,| > | and God after it." - the Imam Husayn | > +----------------------------------------+ -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Tue Jul 15 06:17:05 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Mon Jul 14 17:36:39 1997 Received: (qmail 20776 invoked from network); 15 Jul 1997 00:33:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.119) by hm3.hotmail.com with SMTP; 15 Jul 1997 00:33:02 -0000 Message-ID: <33CAC598.30D0@hotmail.com> Date: Mon, 14 Jul 1997 20:34:32 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: More Bahai "art" Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 6862 Stephi Stevens wrote: > > Hmmmmmmm, for me there is something about your criticism of > your so called "Baha'i Art" that smacks of the Western concept > of art criticism. It seems incomplete, self-directed, and lacking > justice. There's a certain approach in the surrounding milieu which has seeped into the Bahai Faith too that thinks when anything is identified as "Western" the final word has been spoken.... I can't imagine anyone who truly understands the intimate relation of the critical faculty with the creative making such a comment.... > > Perhaps instead of looking at this art from the Western viewpoint, > it might be wiser to look at this art from a new viewpoint, one that > reflects what we are all trying to learn from the Baha'i Teachings. > Of course, you may not be Baha'i, in which case, excuse me for > making assumptions. I am a member of the Bahai Faith. Hitler and Stalin both urged a "new" viewpoint for their appalling kitsch.... "socialist realism," etc.... Such an excuse rings hollow to me. > > But if you are not a Baha'i, then why are you passing judgment > on our work? This is a new religion, still developing, still in its > childhood stage. It's hardly fair to judge the art of a developing > Faith by the same standards of past Faiths. False. Only the most demanding standards of the past are worthy of the present.... Anything else is an insult to the human spirit.... These Faiths have > had thousands of years to find their artistic niche in the cosmos. > We've only been here for one hundred and fifty odd years. > Come on, we're trying to find ourselves, and anyone who is a > teacher knows the best way to inspire people to do better is > through praise, and certainly not through unjust criticism. False. I taught literature for many years and the "encouragement" travesty of modern education has ruined the critical faculties of most young students.... > > Now if you are a Baha'i, wouldn't you consider this an opportunity > to practice loving patience with people who are not up to your > artistic standards? I would dare say that if you create art, you > yourself would not consider your art "Baha'i Art" in the best > sense of the definition of "Baha'i Art". As you know, I do not > consider most of what art is created today by artists who are > Baha'i to be "Baha'i Art". I don't believe any of us know what > that is yet, so it's impossible to create. It's impossible also for it to develop, since fascist control exerts itself on everyone's conscience.... > > You know quite often in your statements the words "in > my opinion" or something to that affect came up. Consider > this, wouldn't it be wiser to find out for yourself what > Baha'u'llah has to say about art, about creativity, about the > power of choice, about love, about justice, about honesty, > about wisdom and base your "opinions" on that, rather > than on what you feel is right, that is if you are Baha'i? The reality of human experience is not gainsaid by the idealism of Baha'u'llah's Teachings.... > > Loving regards, > Stephi > stevens@azstarnet.com > > >RMckin6046 wrote: > >> > >> Frederick: > >> > >> I was not unhappy with s.r.b. at all and have no personal problems > >> with the moderated format, BUT I supported your desire to establish > >> the alt.religion.bahai newsgroup because I agree that frank and free > >> exchange of ideas is essentially healthy in this society. I have been > >> unable to access directly alt.rel.bahai from aol, but I don't > >> particularly try hard to either. That said: I was very disappointed > >> in your last post here on the arts. It certainly made me wonder if I > >> was right to support your proposal. > > > >You've been unable to access apparently for reasons I am not permitted > >to elaborate on.... Since you are "very disappointed" in my views on > >what passes for "art" in the Bahai Faith, you consider suppressing my > >views? I don't quite follow how that would be supporting "frank and > >free exchange," etc.... > > > >> > >> You said: "There is no art allowed in the Baha'i Faith... only > >> propaganda.. what passes for "art" is really only the crudest > >> banalities permitted...." > > > >That's the way I see it.... Philistinism only welcomed in this > >religion--not the rich tensions of what is truly worthy of the > >name of art.... Rich tensions grounded in the antinomies of > >the human heart.... > > > >> > >> What a "cranky" and judgmental statement. I fancy myself a sometime > >> artist, and I do not feel that I am being allowed only to produce > >> propaganda; although, my little wood burnings, paintings and prose may > >> indeed be banal. > > > >Or dilettante? That's the Bahai conception of artist in my opinion.... > >Quite congruent really with the philistinism of modern society in > >most ways.... > > > > On the other hand, I have several artworks produced > >> by other Baha'is that I adore and have witnessed numerous singers and > >> dancers and actors who are real artists. > > > >The more inarticulate the art the better in this religion.... > > > > To characterize what they do > >> the way you did is really insulting. I do not always "get" the modern > >> dance stuff [I lean more to Gospel & classical dance/music], and the > >> youth workshops sometimes leave me scratching my head, but who can > >> deny their hard work, their devoted expression, their obvious energy > >> and their love of their art... not to mention their love of > >> Baha'u'llah? Besides you of course. > > > >Oh terrible me!!! Not insulting, accurate art criticism of the > >usual tripe that's fobbed off as art in Bahai circles where art > >is unknown, really.... Gross propaganda, what the poet Robert > >Hayden was fond of calling "doctrinaire propaganda," is all the > >Bahai Faith, by and large, has to offer or ALLOWS.... > > > >> > >> Very disappointed, and hoping that you retract your statement, or at > >> least learn to keep such hurtful opinions to yourself, > > > >That's it.... Close your mouth and go away if you can't say > >what we want to hear.... Precisely what philistines have said > >and done.... > > > >> > >> Richard > >> ----------------------------------------------------------- > >> Dr. Richard A McKinley > >> Fayetteville NC USA > >> RMckin6046@aol.com & RMCK-BEAR@juno.com > > > >-- > >Frederick Glaysher > >UseNet: alt.religion.bahai -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com, or ask your ISP to add it. -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com, or ask your ISP to add it. From - Fri Jul 18 07:46:06 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Fri Jul 18 04:17:02 1997 Received: (qmail 3201 invoked from network); 18 Jul 1997 11:14:55 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.117) by hm3.hotmail.com with SMTP; 18 Jul 1997 11:14:55 -0000 Message-ID: <33CF508C.3A80@hotmail.com> Date: Fri, 18 Jul 1997 07:16:28 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc CC: FG@hotmail.com, fiospots@pond.com Subject: More Bahai art forum Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 1675 David Fiorito and Jennie Spotila wrote: > > > > You know quite often in your statements the words "in > > > my opinion" or something to that affect came up. Consider > > > this, wouldn't it be wiser to find out for yourself what > > > Baha'u'llah has to say about art, about creativity, about the > > > power of choice, about love, about justice, about honesty, > > > about wisdom and base your "opinions" on that, rather > > > than on what you feel is right, that is if you are Baha'i? > > > > The reality of human experience is not gainsaid by the idealism of > > Baha'u'llah's Teachings.... > > Sorry for the private e-mail. I usually lurk on the list and am not very > interested in most of the public dialogue. > > I was curious about the exchange above. It is a powerful idea and I was > hoping for some more detail. Could you elaborate? Only in public.... What many Bahais claim Baha'u'llah "says" on this or that is merely what they themselves believe he says.... Or it is what a Shiite Bahai interpreter has told them Baha'u'llah "says." Baha'u'llah's own writings embrace powerful human antinomies, rich in the tension of lived life, not theoretical idealism, if you will.... True art probes those realities of life and the soul, trusting in God's creation; kitsch repeats a script.... > > Sincerely, > > David Fiorito > > p.s. Your points on art are well taken. -D.F. Well, thank you for saying so.... I'd appreciate it if you'd share with us your ideas.... -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com, or ask your ISP to add it. From - Sun Jul 20 07:40:16 1997 >From fiospots@pond.com Sat Jul 19 20:15:59 1997 Received: from wanda.pond.com by wanda.vf.pond.com (8.8.5) id XAA24950; Sat, 19 Jul 1997 23:17:25 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <199707200317.XAA24950@wanda.vf.pond.com> From: "David Fiorito and Jennie Spotila" To: Subject: Re: More Bahai art forum Date: Sat, 19 Jul 1997 23:13:51 -0400 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet Mail 4.70.1155 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 1803 Interesting. It has always been my experience that the teachings of Baha'u'llah only become real when they reveal themselves in my interactions with others, or in self reflective moments. I only truly understand the Word of God when it happens. Each time a new realization hits me it colors my perception of the past, sets up new ways of living, and changes the way I plan for the future. In short - my life experience is in some way shaped by my encounters with the Word of God. I am not an artist but it would seem to me that art springs from life experience, and if the artist sees life through Baha'i colored glasses than that is what he will express. To the artist the expression is born of, to use your words, "powerful human antinomies, rich in the tension of lived life", and the "theoretical idealism" may be a silent partner in the process. Our perception of the world is based on raw data which passes through many filters; some that we are conscious of and some that we are not. Just as we take things in through filters, we also pass them out through a different set. In this way ideas expressed in the Word of God will influence the expression of the artistic impulse, either in the way we see the world or wish to express its perception. I am not sure if this creates Baha'i art or just art. One thing I feel strongly - Baha'u'llah's teachings are for all people and not just those who sign declaration cards. To me the "sprit of the age" is creating new forms of expression in all corners of humanity and not just in the Baha'i community. I guess after all that the simple answer is I believe in art as an expression of human experience and not a simple representation of a particular ideology. Thoughts? Sincerely, David Fiorito From - Wed Aug 20 11:16:51 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Wed Aug 20 07:23:52 1997 Received: (qmail 7363 invoked from network); 20 Aug 1997 14:22:12 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.119) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 20 Aug 1997 14:22:12 -0000 Message-ID: <33FAFDF9.3161@hotmail.com> Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 10:23:53 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc,soc.rights.human,soc.culture.israel,soc.culture.iranian,news.ad min.censorship,news.admin.misc,news.admin.net-abuse.misc,news.admin.net-abuse.usenet CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: More Bahai censorship - moderators Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 8130 POSTED TO SOC.RELIGION.BAHAI ON 8-20-97: Mac0000013 wrote: [clip] > Greetings; > > Whoever this F. Glaysher is, he makes some assumptions which appear not to > be proven. > > He appears to claim, without evidence, that there is censorship in > regards to talk.religion.bahai ---- he then claims that the majority of > the Baha'i's are intolerant, as when he claims that "...both were crushed > by the intolerant Baha'i majority." I and others have posted numerous censored messages to alt.religion.bahai as evidence. They may be found on www.dejanews.com by searching for "SRB Censored" from January 1, 1997 to the present under talk.religion.bahai and alt.religion.bahai. Well over 30 other people have stated they have been censored and their messages too may be found on www.dejanews.com. In terms of an "intolerant Bahai majority," I am clearly referring to the 691 majority who voted NO for an unmoderated talk.religion.bahai--in clear excess of what usually takes place on UseNet where technical NO votes are the only legitimate ones.... > > Before addressing some other issues, if I remember correctly, the > moderators have explained the policy of the newsgroup. If one wishes to > engage in the flame wars, the catcalling, the ad homin. attacks far too > prevalent in other newsgroups, then one's posting is returned with a > comment as to where one may wish to employ some degree of courtesy. One > is then free to resubmit the posting: a posting that should be on topic, > address the issues, and not make personal attacks. This neglects that many people have stated their posts were innocuous and relevant to discussion. An umoderated Big 8 newsgroup on the Bahai Faith would provide a place where people can discuss it with confidence that no one is suppressing their opinions. Soc.religion.bahai has lost its credibility for good reasons. > > ALSO, I believe that there was this particular individual quite loudly > declaring that there was "trouble in RiverCity" and demanding a vote be > taken. The vote was taken. The proposal was defeated: I believe that > under two hundred voted for it and more than five or six hundred voted > against it... Rather than abide by the decision and accept the outcome, > within a short time, a newsgroup was formed by this same person. All of the above is based on misperception and misunderstanding of the UseNet voting guidelines. First of all it's an interest poll. If 100+ people are interested in forming a newsgroup, they should be allowed to do so on any topic they choose. No ideological reasons are valid. NO votes should only be cast for technical reasons, i.e., the proposed group is in the wrong hierarchy of UseNet, which was not a problem with talk.religion.bahai, it was definitely in the right one, the talk.* hierarchy. I did not form alt.religion.bahai. A member of the UseNet Volunteer Votetakers did. I believe he did because he perceived the manifest injustice of what Bahais did.... > > Perhaps I am mistaken by there was a vote, the vote went against the > person, and the person then implemented a Newsgroup meeting the parameters > of his particular wishes and that Newsgroup was not, to my limited > knowledge, opposed by any one of the establishment. Alt.religion.bahai does not meet the parameters of what 157 YES votes wanted: a Big 8 unmoderated newsgroup, open and highly accessible by all.... > > And now this individual claims that there is censorship when he is still > touting his statements publicly upon his own little Newsgroup and in this > newsgroup? I am not the only person making that claim. I am surprised, somewhat, that you and others are still claiming that to be the case. Please read the record via www.dejanews.com where you'll find many people saying so.... > > At the same time this person now claims that 157 people were suppressed > --- not, I hope, as has been done in Cambodia, or in parts of South > America---- and he now claims that there was fraud but in re-reading that > particular post I was unable to read of any specific evidence documenting > such an assertion. Using www.dejanews.com you can find many postings under "NO vote campaign" that I believe will document my accusation of voter fraud.... > > With all due respect to all concerned, it would appear that this > particular individual is demanding that everyone halt all activities and > heed his declarations, his opinions and accord him wondrous status of > knowledge and that we accept his statement of censorship (self-defined) > and fraud and intolerance. You, like others, continue to attempt to present me as an isolated, aberrant individual with an unjust axe to grind. I believe that is tantamount to character assassination and very old and tiresome strategem for anyone who has followed the discussion all along these several months. I am not alone in believing censorship exists on soc.religion.bahai. Why do you and others continue to insist otherwise? > > I must apologize that I haven't been in his particular country for as many > years as he has, nor do I have the bounty of his vast education and > attainments, HOWEVER, many of the Baha'i's I have met in this country and > others have not been intolerant nor do they claim others are when a vote > goes against them. I find it interesting that the moderators permit you to sarcastically attack and insult me in very personal terms but routinely reject much milder posts from myself and other Bahais and non-Bahais. I believe it is unfair and inconsistent of them and that they owe me an apology, as you do, and the decency of this response.... I respond above to the "intolerant" allegation. > > Over the years I have met many Baha'i's who strive to submerge the ego > that they might serve others... for some it is an easier contest than for > others. Few wish to be so embroiled in battles and contests as to have > little energy for personal transformation that will help their > communities. THUS, I find myself at a loss to understand the statement > that, even in this alleged instance, so many Baha'i's were intolerant --- > as defined by F. Glaysher within the parameters of a proposal being > defeated. Again, with all respect, you are ignoring what UseNet voting guidelines are and that they were ignored and abused by many Bahais.... Instead, you are in the above passage, I believe, blaming the victim of injustice and censorship and you seem to be intimating I'm a megalomaniac in the maw of my ego.... Unfair, I believe. > > I lack the vast experience F. Glaysher must have so I can not make the > comments he has regarding others, but perhaps we might all practice > something I learned from two wonderful Baha'i ladies in Columbus, Ohio ( > Olivia Kelsey and Emily Chavez ) who stated that if I managed to keep my > mouth shut and my eyes open and my ears attentive, then perhaps I might > learn something --- and especially, learn how good others are. Your opening sentence seems quite derisive to me. The rest of the passage is irrelevant to the censorship issue. > > There is not a day that goes by that I surely could take that injunction > to heart more and more: and especially when trying to learn some of the > foundations of patience and courtesy and submerging ego to serve others so > I might learn something of the Baha'i Faith. Does the Bahai Faith support, stand for, and encourage censorship? That is the question.... Many have said YES. Many have experienced it. The first vote for talk.religion.bahai proved for most fair-minded observers. The next vote approaches come late September. You and other Bahais will have the opportunity once again to live up to the high ideals of the Bahai Writings on liberty and freedom of religious conscience.... -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Wed Aug 20 11:17:09 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Wed Aug 20 07:50:38 1997 Received: (qmail 7560 invoked from network); 20 Aug 1997 14:50:36 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.119) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 20 Aug 1997 14:50:36 -0000 Message-ID: <33FB04A1.295D@hotmail.com> Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 10:52:17 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc,soc.rights.human,soc.culture.iranian,soc.culture.israel,news.ad min.censorship,news.admin.misc,news.admin.net-abuse.misc,news.admin.net-abuse.usenet CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: More Bahai Censorship- moderators Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 2942 POSTED TO SOC.RELIGION.BAHAI ON 8-20-97: Tricia Hague-Blackford wrote: > = > [Moderator's note: This is the last submission that will be accepted on= the > thread regarding censorship. Thank you for your understanding.] > = > I too have found this topic to be most disruptive. > I would like to see this topic dropped. > = > I have tried to see both sides of this consultation, but it seems that > while everyone is looking at the negative side of things, that is all t= hey > will get in return. To be successful in anything at all, whether it be= > teaching or working in whatever profession, its important to focus on t= he > positive side of things. Should the world have ignored Hitler and concentrated on the positive? The above reasoning makes no sense in my opinion. If an injustice has been done, widely thought so by many people, it's not going away by pretending it didn't happen.... Indeed, it is incumbent upon those = who care about justice and the Bahai Faith to confront even the unpleasant realities in order to defend both. You are also neglecting, I believe, that when an evil is perpetrated, it must be confronted in order for = it not to continue over and over and over.... = Somethings don't go away just because we don't like them.... > = > What we sow, we shall also reap..... Censorship, lies, deceit, deception, equivocation, and half-truths can only breed further unpalatable crops.... > = > What we reap, we shall also sow...... a different way of looking at th= ings > for sure, but think about it a minute or five... It's a truism which n= eeds > to be given some thought methinks. ;-) I believe you're ignoring the "negativism," it seems, of 691 Bahais violating the rights of 157 people who wanted a free and open newsgroup that they could have trust and confidence in.... > = > `Abdu'l-Bah=E1 talks about this in His Writings, and I think if we cont= inue > to be negative about such matters, nothing good will come from it. Abdu'l-Baha talks about many things in his writings. Can you quote a passage that justifies censorship and persecution of others for their beliefs? I see your insistence on anyone saying anything about what actually happened as quite naive and innocent. I mean you no insult by that. You raise a serious point of view but one that is flawed by the seriousness of what it neglects to take into account. > = > Tricia > = > THE MOST PATHETIC PERSON IN THE WORLD IS THE PERSON WHO HAS SIGHT, BUT = NO > VISION... > Helen Keller (Blind, Deaf and Mute) I believe you're also failing to see the spectacle of the moderators cutting off all discussion on this topic as they state they're going to above.... [clip] -- = Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on = www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Wed Aug 20 11:16:59 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Wed Aug 20 07:32:39 1997 Received: (qmail 7439 invoked from network); 20 Aug 1997 14:32:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.119) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 20 Aug 1997 14:32:37 -0000 Message-ID: <33FB006D.1BA5@hotmail.com> Date: Wed, 20 Aug 1997 10:34:21 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc,soc.rights.human,soc.culture.israel,soc.culture.iranian,news.ad min.censorship,news.admin.misc,news.admin.net-abuse.misc,news.admin.net-abuse.usenet CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: More Bahai censorship-moderators Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 1527 POSTED TO SOC.RELIGION.BAHAI ON 8-20-97: Rowe, Thomas wrote: > [clip] > I'm one of those misguided folks who voted "no" based on my > understanding of the issues. My understanding could have been faulty > and/or my logic for the vote could have been wrong. Nevertheless, I > don't apologize for my vote. It was not an attempt to censor free > discussion despite what any of the 157 positive voters may think. > Notice it became a non-issue when another avenue for an unmoderated > discussion list on the Baha'i Faith came into being (sorry - don't have > the address on the top of my head). It's not a "non-issue." Alt.religion.bahai is on an obscure poorly available alt.* hierarchy which has not allowed many of the 157 YES voters even to participate.... If you now recognize you voted for the wrong reasons, I would think you wouldn't mind admitting it and apologizing to those who definitely have been hurt by your actions.... [clip] > Tom Rowe trowe@uwsp.edu > ********************************************************** > They say that ignorance and apathy are the two great evils of > today's world. Well, I wouldn't know about that and I don't > care anyway. > ********************************************************** > https://www.uwsp.edu/acad/psych/tr/home1.htm -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Wed Aug 27 15:41:26 1997 >From bn872@freenet.carleton.ca Wed Aug 27 09:01:53 1997 Received: from freenet5.carleton.ca.carleton.ca (bn872@freenet5.carleton.ca [134.117.136.25]) by freenet1.carleton.ca (8.8.6/8.8.6) with ESMTP id LAA29722 for ; Wed, 27 Aug 1997 11:57:01 -0400 (EDT) Received: (bn872@localhost) by freenet5.carleton.ca.carleton.ca (8.8.5/NCF-Sun-Client) id LAA25335; Wed, 27 Aug 1997 11:57:00 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 11:57:00 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <199708271557.LAA25335@freenet5.carleton.ca.carleton.ca> From: bn872@freenet.carleton.ca (McKenny Michael) To: FG@hotmail.com Subject: More on Expulsion Reply-To: bn872@freenet.carleton.ca X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 8893 Greetings, Frederick, from Ottawa. I just sent you several other oieces together on this expulsion. I'm now sending here the appendix to my reply to the Canadian National Assembly, cced to the Baha'i World Centre. Briefly, in my estimation the fundamentalist mindset is well prepared and expecting both internal and external opposition. Thus, i have encouraged a very positive response, in the hope that this well best demonstrate the fact that this is a new age and the concepts of the past are inapplicable. Fare very Well, Michael (As far as I know, this appendix to my letter to the National Spiritual Assembly of the Baha'is of Canada with a copy to the Baha'i World Centre has not been included in the H-Net material.) Greetings from Ottawa. This is essentially the same mesage as posted earlier today on irfan. It is posted here for the benefit of the subscribers of this list who are not on irfan. It was a reply to a post on irfan which contained correspondence to and from the Universal House of Justice about my removal from Baha'i membership. As I do not have the permission of the person involved, I have deleted references to that individual. At the outset, in response to speculations I have noticed, I had best make it clear that there was no hidden pattern of behaviour and attitude about which Auxiliary Board Member Mrs. Suzanne Tamas or the Universal House of Justice addressed me, no additioned items beyond what you have noticed in my posts to Baha'i cyberspace. Let me add that my purpose was to advance the Cause of God and its Supreme Institution, and this has not altered. I am sorry if at this early hour of the morning I fail to find the most appropriate words, the expressions best able effectively to penetrate the clouds of misunderstanding and suspicion. There are concepts to express which are elevations in the esteem and respect for the current members of the Universal House of Justice, and of the Wellspring of Guidance as a whole. As in so many things in this Faith, these may seem paradoxical, as, for example, the Right of God, the most important Baha'i tax, being completely voluntary. The most significant concept for me to convey is that, although the assertion of inerrancy and the expectation that the least intimation of authoritative pleasure necessitates instant, exact and complete obedience may appear to be the literal materialization of the intent of Baha'u'llah for this Age, such a view can only be accepted unquestionably by one mindset, and one fraction of humanity. That is to say, however gratifying it is to be able to feel that there is a vast corpus of unmistakably literally correct Text, interpretation and legislation, such a feeling, if insisted upon as the only acceptable definition of believer, transforms the Baha'i Faith into something incompatible with its fundamental purpose, the harmony of humanity. Thrilling as it may be to possess the vision of a species hearkening at once to even the suggestions of authoritative desire, whatsoever it may be, such a concept varies from the spirit of the Age of Maturity and differs from what would permit the vast variety of human thought to abide harmoniously beneath the sheltering shade of the World Order of Baha'u'llah. Today the Manifestation of God has called for the people to read the Sacred Text for themselves, and to live the life in accord with those fundamental principles revealed to ensure the transformation of childish habits of dictatorial and factional domination and immature perceptions of animosity into reasoned assent and heartfelt participation in a moral and just society, demonstrably divine. That one of the guiding lights of Baha'i community life has been the unanimous endeavour to accomplish even decisions deemed erroneous neither exempts those responsible from altering what has been thus shown to have failed to meet the needs of the human species, nor abolishes the need for Baha'is to live the life according to the fundamental principles of the Faith. Today the greater hand of God has so accomplished its purpose that these principles are widely hailed as the basis of civilized society. Thus, while Baha'i authority may seek to express an expectant decree over many a lesser matter, and find the believers seeking to actualize this, yet, any utterance that fundamental principle is to be set aside, suffices to demonstrate the distance yet to be covered before the attainment of the Tree of Life upon which we are all leaves brought together in unity. It merits mention that many years elapsed during which I attempted to promote the Cause of God and did not address either the Internet or the Universal House of Justice. The evidences of the general lack of success of the intensive efforts by the Faith for its widespread and worldwide expansion are clear. Whatever further remoteness from fundamental Baha'i principle, whatever views difficult to distinguish from prejudice against class (the educated), country (America), and understanding (liberalism), attachment to exclusivist literalism may produce, whatever actions facilitating an attribution of correspondence between present Baha'i behaviour and attitude and the behaviour and attitude of historical states under oligarchical control and beset by mindsets of factionalism, the minds and the hearts of entire categories of humans (the educated, the Americans and the liberals, for example) are more ready to recognize the lofty nature of the Universal House of Justice and the validity of the Cause of God when they have witnessed the ability of God to inspire a transformation from previous patterns of behaviour and attitude (patriarchal and authoritarian) into examples of the essential and fundamental principles revealed for this Age of Maturity. Let there be no doubt. The existence of an exclusively male Central Authority, the insistence on the silence of some of the colours of the rainbow of human thought, the persistence of an attitude of animosity and partisan politics are completely incompatible with a global ethic and an all-embracing Faith. These traits, so much at variance with the purpose of God, can not demonstrate that the Baha'i Faith is a New Garden, a maturation of human unity in diversity. And now, in addition to the reality that whole segments of humanity have assessed the Cause of God as invalid, as a perpetuation of primitive habits, an individual informing the Universal House of Justice of this clear evidence of the timeliness of further advancing in the direction of our essential principles, a person seeking to demonstrate that this community does practise what it preaches is proclaimed to have proven his lack of membership. I will repeat that my sole purpose was to provide the opportunity for the troops to render homage to the Blessed Beauty and to His Wellspring of Guidance. Paradoxical as it may appear through literalist eyes, I support fully the Institution of the Universal House of Justice, and I had hoped even that the steps required to permit this Institution to attain an adequate height so that it may be seen by all the peoples of the world as the beacon of guidance for this Age could be taken by its current members in order that they may have the greatest possible respect. So great is my support of the Universal House of Justice, and so alarmed am I at the precedent which seems to have been set through the apparent creation of the status of Baha'i heretic, so antithetical to the essential freedom of religious thought, conscience and understanding taught by the Master to ensure this Faith is not divided into sects that I am announcing, subject to whatever reconsideration may occur on the receipt of the response from the Universal House of Justice to my message, that I have officially become a neo-pagan, and a few days ago registered as a member of the Ottawa Pagan Library. However, my personal action in removing the anomaly of an existing Baha'i heretic does not solve the broader and general issues which contributed to so remarkable an historical occurrence. God willing, these may speedily be dealt with in a manner which facilitates the true recognition of the oneness in essential diversity of all of humankind. May this find you all very well, and may that long be so. Peace, Michael. -- "My name's McKenny, Mike McKenny, Warrant Officer, Solar Guard." (Tom Corbett #1 STAND BY FOR MARS p2) From - Wed Jun 04 07:20:14 1997 >From fran@schubert.crhc.uiuc.edu Tue Jun 3 12:07:12 1997 Received: (from fran@localhost) by schubert.crhc.uiuc.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id OAA14338; Tue, 3 Jun 1997 14:10:18 -0500 (CDT) Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 14:10:18 -0500 (CDT) From: Fran Baker Message-Id: <199706031910.OAA14338@schubert.crhc.uiuc.edu> To: FG@hotmail.com Subject: My last email Cc: fran@schubert.crhc.uiuc.edu Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-MD5: BHqm1KL78PHXEcQIF0oVvA== X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 178 Hi Fred, I hear you. I'm sorry I created all that work for you (but you did a nice editing job, and I appreciate that). I will post from now on. Your friend, Fran From - Wed Jun 04 07:59:19 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Wed Jun 4 04:18:44 1997 Received: (from root@localhost) by f14.hotmail.com (8.7.5/8.7.3) id EAA28266; Wed, 4 Jun 1997 04:18:12 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <199706041118.EAA28266@f14.hotmail.com> Received: from 199.179.42.118 by www.hotmail.com with HTTP; Wed, 04 Jun 1997 04:18:12 PDT X-Originating-IP: [199.179.42.118] From: "Frederick Glaysher" To: fran@crhc.uiuc.edu Cc: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: My last email Content-Type: text/plain Date: Wed, 04 Jun 1997 04:18:12 PDT X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 1145 Thanks, Fran. I've been getting email from other people too and it's not easy to keep up. Hope you understand. I encourage you to post. I think you have a lot of worthwhile ideas to contribute. Fred -- >From fran@schubert.crhc.uiuc.edu Tue Jun 3 12:07:12 1997 >Received: (from fran@localhost) by schubert.crhc.uiuc.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id OAA14338; Tue, 3 Jun 1997 14:10:18 -0500 (CDT) >Date: Tue, 3 Jun 1997 14:10:18 -0500 (CDT) >From: Fran Baker >Message-Id: <199706031910.OAA14338@schubert.crhc.uiuc.edu> >To: FG@hotmail.com >Subject: My last email >Cc: fran@schubert.crhc.uiuc.edu >Mime-Version: 1.0 >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit >Content-MD5: BHqm1KL78PHXEcQIF0oVvA== > > >Hi Fred, > >I hear you. I'm sorry I created all that work for you (but >you did a nice editing job, and I appreciate that). > >I will post from now on. > >Your friend, >Fran > --------------------------------------------------------- Get Your *Web-Based* Free Email at https://www.hotmail.com --------------------------------------------------------- From - Tue Jul 08 08:46:53 1997 >From kalimatp@aol.com Thu Jul 3 21:01:36 1997 Received: from default (p18.hwts10.loop.net [207.211.62.93]) by stevie.loop.net (8.6.12/8.6.12) with SMTP id UAA11372; Thu, 3 Jul 1997 20:48:12 -0700 Date: Thu, 3 Jul 1997 20:48:12 -0700 Message-Id: <199707040348.UAA11372@stevie.loop.net> X-Mailer: SendM@ail V1.03 Content-Type: text From: KalimatP@aol.com CC: Subject: New from Kalimat Press! X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 4065 Three New Titles Available from Kalimat Press _____________________________ THE WISDOM OF THE MASTER The Spiritual Teachings of 'Abdu'l-Baha _____________________________ This treasury of spiritual inspiration, gleaned from daily events in the life of 'Abdu'l-Baha and from his words and writings, is designed with the New Age seeker in mind. Brought together for the first time, these quotations and stories are a source of growth and healing and a guidebook to personal transformation. Here is a thoughtful gift which can be used as an introduction to the Baha'i Faith, and a continuing source of spiritual inspiration for believers. The book contains new translations from the Baha'i World Center. Illustrated with photographs of 'Abdu'l-Baha Retail Price: $17.00, hardcover only Available August 1997 (Pre-paid orders before the publication date receive a special price of $14.95) _____________________________ PIVOT OF THE UNIVERSE Nasir al-Din Shah Qajar and the Iranian Monarchy, 1831-1896 by Abbas Amanat published by University of California Press _____________________________ This is the first full book in English on Nasiru'd-Din Shah, the man who presided at the trial of the Bab in Tabriz and reigned as the king of Iran during the first fifty years of Baha'i history. Read this thorough and scholarly account of his life and times. Full sections are devoted to the Bab's trial, to the attempt on the life of the shah, and to the subsequent bloody persecution of the Babis. But, the greater portion of the book deals with a history of the shah, his life at court, and the changes wrought in the Persian monarchy during this period. Retail Price: $45.00, hardcover only (Maximum discount 20%, for Baha'i libraries only) _____________________________ HOW TO LIVE SIDEWAYS A Children's Book by Michael Fitzgerald Illustrated by John Burns _____________________________ This whimsical compilation of the Baha'i Sacred Writings is certain to amuse and fasincate any child. Laugh with Michael Fitzgerald as he offers his delightful perscriptions for living the Baha'i life with a freshness and spirit that is both profound and childlike. Retail Price: $14.95, hardcover only Available August 1997 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * How To Order Kalimat Press Books---It's Your Choice! * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *** Send an e-mail reply (kalimatp@aol.com) and include the following: * Your name * Your mailing address * Your phone number (optional) * The name(s) of the book(s) you are ordering * How many copies of each you would like * The price of each book * Your billing address *** Call Publishers Services at 415-883-3530 and place your order by phone (this is especially helpful if you would like to pay by credit card) *** Look Kalimat Press up on the Internet at https://www.kalimat.com and fill out the order form on the website *** Fax your order to 415-883-4280 *** Leave a message with your phone number: 800-788-4067. An additional note: 10% will be added for shipping & postage in the USA. International orders, please specify whether you would like your books shipped via air (faster but at an additional cost) or by sea (very slow). ______________________________________________________ To order a Kalimat Press catalog with a complete list of our publications simply send us an email request (kalimatp@aol.com) and include your name and address. ______________________________________________________ You are welcome to pay a visit to our website: www.kalimat.com You will find a host of interesting information: * A complete catalog of the books that we carry * Book summaries * Book jacket pictures * An e-mail form for either ordering books or requesting a Kalimat Press catalog * Links to related Baha'i websites From - Fri Aug 22 10:40:24 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Fri Aug 22 07:26:08 1997 Received: (qmail 12667 invoked from network); 22 Aug 1997 14:26:06 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.117) by hm2.hotmail.com with SMTP; 22 Aug 1997 14:26:06 -0000 Message-ID: <33FDA1E6.1B13@hotmail.com> Date: Fri, 22 Aug 1997 10:27:50 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: FG@hotmail.com Subject: New RFD: sept Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 4581 From: FG Newsgroups: news.announce.newgroups,news.groups,soc.religion.bahai,soc.culture.iranian,soc.culture.israel,so c.rights.human,alt.religion.bahai,news.admin.censorship Subject: RFD: talk.religion.bahai Followup-To: news.groups Date: 17 Jan 1997 23:32:40 -0000 Organization: . Lines: 93 Sender: tale@rodan.UU.NET Approved: newgroups-request@uunet.uu.net Message-ID: <853543959.13303@uunet.uu.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: rodan.uu.net Archive-Name: talk.religion.bahai REQUEST FOR DISCUSSION (RFD) unmoderated group talk.religion.bahai This is a formal Request for Discussion (RFD) to create an unmoderated worldwide discussion group called talk.religion.bahai. This is not a Call for Votes (CFV); you cannot vote at this time. Procedural details appear below. All followup discussion should be crossposted to news.groups. Newsgroup line: talk.religion.bahai Unmoderated discussion of the Bahai faith. RATIONALE: talk.religion.bahai All newsgroups on a Big 8 hierarchy given to the discussion of the Bahai faith are moderated. A need exists for an unmoderated forum, and this proposed newsgroup would meet that need. The proponents intend that talk.religion.bahai will complement, rather than supplant, the existing moderated group soc.religion.bahai. The establishment of unmoderated companion groups is a well-accepted practice on Usenet. This newsgroup will be part of the talk.* hierarchy, which is exclusively for unmoderated groups. CHARTER: talk.religion.bahai All topics or ideas relevant to the Bahai faith -- its history, teachings, theology, etc. -- would be appropriate areas for discussion. The posting of articles not specifically relevant to the Bahai faith is strongly discouraged. Also discouraged are personal messages, large ASCII graphics, special-format files, pornography, and any postings of a purely commercial nature. Readers are asked not to start or prolong flamewars in this newsgroup, but to focus instead on articles and threads written in more moderate terms. Crossposting to irrelevant groups is also discouraged, and readers are encouraged to redirect followups to reduce excessive crossposting. Readers may also post articles that have been rejected from soc.religion.bahai, so long as they conform to the charter above. END CHARTER. PROCEDURE: The process of creating newsgroups is twofold. First is the RFD stage, when someone writes a Request for Discussion (RFD) outlining the purpose of the proposed group. The RFD appears in news.announce.newgroups, news.groups, and other relevant discussion groups. Anyone may publicly comment on the RFD in news.groups for a three-week period. During the discussion phase, proponents may modify the RFD in response to suggestions from posters on news.groups. The second stage is the Call for Votes (CFV) stage. The proposal must pass a Usenet-wide vote with a 2/3 supermajority -- and at least 100 more votes in favor than against -- to be created. Anyone with an e-mail address may cast a ballot. A neutral votetaker from the Usenet Volunteer Votetakers (UVV) conducts all CFV's. This RFD attempts to comply with the Usenet newsgroup creation guidelines outlined in "How to Create a New Usenet Newsgroup" and "Writing an RFD." Please refer to these documents if you have further questions about the process. DISTRIBUTION: This RFD has been posted to the following newsgroups: news.announce.newgroups,news.groups,soc.religion.bahai, soc.culture.iranian soc.culture.israel,soc.rights.human, talk.religion.misc,alt.religion.bahai,news.admin.censorship and the following mailing lists: Academic discussion of Bahai faith Subscribe via: jsgreen@umich.edu Bahai discussion list Pointers will appear in the following newsgroups: soc.religion.unitarian-univ,soc.religion.eastern, soc.religion.gnosis,soc.religion.hindu, soc.religion.paganism,soc.religion.quaker, soc.religion.sikhism,soc.religion.vaishnava, soc.religion.atheism,talk.religion.buddhism, talk.religion.newage -- Proponent: Frederick Glaysher -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Fri Jun 06 07:44:39 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Fri Jun 6 04:12:30 1997 Received: (qmail 12272 invoked from network); 6 Jun 1997 11:09:54 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.119) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 6 Jun 1997 11:09:54 -0000 Message-ID: <3397F052.7E4B@hotmail.com> Date: Fri, 06 Jun 1997 07:11:14 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,misc.misc CC: aenglish@scnc.waverly.k12.mi.us Subject: news server works for reading alt.religion.bahai Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 696 >To: FG@hotmail.com >Subject: alt.religion.bahai (was re: listserv access) >References: <338C0AF8.44B5@hotmail.com> <3395cf77.357880358@news.idt.net> <33969E85.61F0@hotmail.com> >Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > >Okay, >Try news.tln.lib.mi.us; this seems to work for me as well, although I >don't know about everyone. I'll keep looking, and see if I can find >others :). >-Andrea :) >aenglish@scnc.waverly.k12.mi.us > Hey, great! This news server works for reading but not posting back to alt.religion.bahai Is there some way to set it up to post back too? -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Mon Jun 09 07:18:01 1997 >From aenglish@scnc.waverly.k12.mi.us Fri Jun 6 07:29:37 1997 Received: from andrea (pm102-11.dialip.mich.net [35.9.14.172]) by scnc.waverly.k12.mi.us (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id KAA09426 for ; Fri, 6 Jun 1997 10:29:13 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <33981EA2.2A1A@scnc.waverly.k12.mi.us> Date: Fri, 06 Jun 1997 10:28:50 -0400 From: Andrea Reply-To: aenglish@scnc.waverly.k12.mi.us Organization: Waverly High School X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0 (Win95; I) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: news server works for reading alt.religion.bahai References: <3397F052.7E4B@hotmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 714 Hi, I don't know if posting can be set up; I think if you can't post through a server it's something that can only be changed on their end. I did do a test post that seemed to work, as far as I could tell, so I guess I'd recommend trying again. Another server that seems to carry alt.religon.bahai is ftp.louisa.net, I think. I chose the "add new group" command to get alt.religion.bahai, and I got a message saying that the group isn't stored locally, but it's being downloaded. It's probably working now (the message said it would take a few minutes), so you might want to try it. I don't know about posting messages, but it's worth a try. -Andrea :) aenglish@scnc.waverly.k12.mi.us From - Fri May 16 06:27:07 1997 >From glaysher@pop.hotmail.com Thu May 15 11:56:54 1997 Received: (qmail 16605 invoked from network); 14 May 1997 11:28:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.118) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 14 May 1997 11:28:15 -0000 Message-ID: <3379A213.54DF@pop.hotmail.com> Date: Wed, 14 May 1997 07:29:23 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: glaysher@pop.hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,misc.misc Subject: news.Zippo.com adds alt.religion.bahai References: <5l6tlj$peh$1@bilbo.reference.com> <19970512195942.12277.qmail@nym.alias.net> <5l82os$dtl$1@bilbo.reference.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 224 alt.religion.bahai has been picked up by www.zippo.com, if anyone's interested in using their server for access.... I believe it's $12.00 a year for newsgroups.... -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Thu May 15 07:10:02 1997 >From litterer@cs.umass.edu Mon May 12 08:40:20 1997 Received: from questar.cs.umass.edu (questar.cs.umass.edu [128.119.40.145]) by freya.cs.umass.edu (8.7.6/8.6.9) with SMTP id LAA15117 for ; Mon, 12 May 1997 11:40:17 -0400 Message-Id: <199705121540.LAA15117@freya.cs.umass.edu> Date: Mon, 12 May 1997 11:40:19 -0500 From: litterer@cs.umass.edu (David A. Litterer) To: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Slow Postings? Organization: Computer Science Dept., UMass/Amherst Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit References: <19970511215019.15504.qmail@nym.alias.net> <5l6tlj$peh$1@bilbo.reference.com> X-Newsreader: Yet Another NewsWatcher 2.3.4 X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 1827 Well, it's gotten to the University of Massachusetts through the following string of servers: kernighan.cs.umass.edu!umass.edu!news.mtholyoke.edu!news.reference.com!not-f or-mail, so it's getting somewhere. Maybe crossposting now and then to some other fairly active newsgroups will make more people aware of its existence. In article <5l6tlj$peh$1@bilbo.reference.com>, FG@hotmail.com wrote: ~ On 11 May 1997 21:50:19 -0000, Notarius wrote: ~ ~ > This post hasnt yet showed up, though I posted Saturday afternoon. ~ ~ > I am reposting it, just in case it was lost. ~ ~ ~ ~ [clip] ~ ~ ~ ~ Osborn wrote: ~ ~ > > (But don't take my word on it--check Dejanews if you wish; BTW ~ ~ > > if you read a.r.b. on https://www.reference.com, note that some ~ ~ > > of my postings after 4/10 apparently never appeared). ~ ~ ~ ~ I've noticed my postings to alt.religion.bahai have been slow ~ ~ to appear too at times. Perhaps it's a propagation problem or ~ ~ something like that. It makes me worry we're reading and posting ~ ~ to alt.religion.bahai only on www.reference.com, and very little ~ ~ propagation of it has yet to take place.... ~ ~ ~ ~ Any ideas or superior knowledge? ~ ~ ~ ~ Frederick Glaysher ~ ~ Rochester Hills, Michigan USA ~ ~ UseNet: alt.religion.bahai ~ ~ ~ -- ~ ~ Posted using Reference.COM https://www.reference.com ~ Browse, Search and Post Usenet and Mailing list Archive and Catalog. ~ ~ InReference, Inc. accepts no responsibility for the content of this posting. -- David A. Litterer Computer Science Department litterer@cs.umass.edu UMass/Amherst 413/545-2319 Go Revs!! From - Fri May 16 06:27:18 1997 >From glaysher@pop.hotmail.com Thu May 15 12:04:44 1997 Received: (qmail 19846 invoked from network); 15 May 1997 10:11:02 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.122) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 15 May 1997 10:11:02 -0000 Message-ID: <337AE17C.1A8D@pop.hotmail.com> Date: Thu, 15 May 1997 06:12:12 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: glaysher@pop.hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,misc.misc CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Slow Postings? References: <5l82os$dtl$1@bilbo.reference.com> <19970514214550.24910.qmail@nym.alias.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 1451 Notarius wrote: > > Frederick wrote: > > >What do you think of another suggestion someone just sent me: > > >>Well, it's gotten to the University of Massachusetts through the following > >>string of servers: > >>kernighan.cs.umass.edu!umass.edu!news.mtholyoke.edu!news.reference.com!not-f > >>or-mail, so it's getting somewhere. > >>Maybe crossposting now and then to some other fairly active newsgroups will > >>make more people aware of its existence. > > Hi Frederick, > I am a techno dummy. Somebody will have to tell us how to > do this. Your suggestion is fine with me. You're not alone! Apparently, if more than one newsgroup is posted to it helps alt.religion.bahai get established on various computers around the world.... That's the depth of my technical understanding.... > > >Incidentally.... Notarius.... Makes me think of someone in > >Augustine's Confessions.... Can't think of the name.... Not > >your namesake, was he? > > I read the book twenty years ago and loved it. > I think of Notarius as somebody who registers and certifies. > He sits on a sidewalk in Buchara, handling contracts and getting > insights in peoples lives. I've heard of Buchara.... As good as anywhere else in this world. Reminds me of selling attar, if you will.... I prefer South and East Asia, though I've been to Dunhuang, close enough to Central Asia.... -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Tue Aug 26 14:52:53 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Tue Aug 26 08:36:21 1997 Received: (qmail 20962 invoked from network); 26 Aug 1997 15:36:19 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.130) by hm3.hotmail.com with SMTP; 26 Aug 1997 15:36:19 -0000 Message-ID: <3402F859.93C@hotmail.com> Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 11:38:01 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,misc.misc,talk.religion.misc,news.admin.censorship CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Newsgroup traffic References: <3402bb02.1681488@news.zippo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 1733 Roger Reini wrote: > > Just thought I'd point out that I show, in my newsreader, 319 posts > to alt.religion.bahai over the last month (July 27 to Aug.26, 1997). > I think this count is low, since I have deleted some of the messages > from my reader. This works out to an average of ten posts per day, > roughly -- perhaps closer to 11 or 12 per day if the other messages > are counted. > > FYI, I show 279 posts to soc.religion.bahai in my reader during the > period of Aug. 5 to Aug. 26. This works out to a little over 13 posts > a day on average, though this may be a bit low, too. > > What's the point of this? These counts could be used as supporting > evidence in the (presumably) forthcoming re-proposal of > talk.religion.bahai. I've heard of it being done. That's one way to count, i.e., per month and daily traffic. How about total postings over a longer period of time? Say since April 1, 1997? Dejanews.com shows 2,207 documents posted to alt.religion.bahai since then.... Divide by 150 (5 months of 30 days) equals 14.71 postings per day. If we consider talk.religion.bahai discussion, on news.groups and elsewhere, there are 759 messages from January 1, 1997 to April 1st. Divided by 90 that's 8.43 messages per day. Given the increase of use, it's reasonable to expect that a Big 8 unmoderated newsgroup would attract a further increase of postings. I think a good case can be made for steady growth of participation and that it would continue. > > Roger (rreini@wwnet.com) > https://fp-www.wwnet.net/~rreini/ -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Tue Aug 26 14:53:02 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Tue Aug 26 11:05:54 1997 Received: (qmail 23236 invoked from network); 26 Aug 1997 18:05:52 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.119) by hm3.hotmail.com with SMTP; 26 Aug 1997 18:05:52 -0000 Message-ID: <34031B61.4B32@hotmail.com> Date: Tue, 26 Aug 1997 14:07:29 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,misc.misc,talk.religion.misc,news.admin.censorship CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Bahai Newsgroup traffic References: <3402bb02.1681488@news.zippo.com> <3402F859.93C@hotmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 2405 Frederick Glaysher wrote: > > Roger Reini wrote: > > > > Just thought I'd point out that I show, in my newsreader, 319 posts > > to alt.religion.bahai over the last month (July 27 to Aug.26, 1997). > > I think this count is low, since I have deleted some of the messages > > from my reader. This works out to an average of ten posts per day, > > roughly -- perhaps closer to 11 or 12 per day if the other messages > > are counted. > > > > FYI, I show 279 posts to soc.religion.bahai in my reader during the > > period of Aug. 5 to Aug. 26. This works out to a little over 13 posts > > a day on average, though this may be a bit low, too. > > > > What's the point of this? These counts could be used as supporting > > evidence in the (presumably) forthcoming re-proposal of > > talk.religion.bahai. > > I've heard of it being done. That's one way to count, i.e., per > month and daily traffic. How about total postings over a longer > period of time? Say since April 1, 1997? Dejanews.com shows > 2,207 documents posted to alt.religion.bahai since then.... > Divide by 150 (5 months of 30 days) equals 14.71 postings > per day. > > If we consider talk.religion.bahai discussion, on news.groups > and elsewhere, there are 759 messages from January 1, 1997 to > April 1st. Divided by 90 that's 8.43 messages per day. It occurs to me belatedly that the RFD was posted on January 17th. Let's count that 70 days of discussion until March 27 when the RESULTS was posted. 759 divided by 70 = 10.84 postings per day during the discussion period for talk.religion.bahai-- better even than SRB after, is it, 5 years or so? I take it as more evidence of genuine interest in an unmoderated newsgroup on the Bahai Faith. > > Given the increase of use, it's reasonable to expect that > a Big 8 unmoderated newsgroup would attract a further > increase of postings. > > I think a good case can be made for steady growth of > participation and that it would continue. > > > > > Roger (rreini@wwnet.com) > > https://fp-www.wwnet.net/~rreini/ > > -- > Frederick Glaysher > UseNet: alt.religion.bahai > Ask your ISP to add it; also available on > www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Wed Aug 27 07:48:35 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Wed Aug 27 03:52:06 1997 Received: (qmail 3242 invoked from network); 27 Aug 1997 10:52:04 -0000 Received: from ts?rh.metronet.lib.mi.us (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.20) by hm3.hotmail.com with SMTP; 27 Aug 1997 10:52:04 -0000 Message-ID: <3404073C.7AB0@hotmail.com> Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 06:53:48 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,misc.misc,talk.religion.misc,news.admin.censorship CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Newsgroup traffic References: <3402bb02.1681488@news.zippo.com> <3402F859.93C@hotmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 3296 Chris wrote: > > In a message which I read on alt.religion.bahai, Frederick Glaysher > wrote > >Roger Reini wrote: > >> > >> Just thought I'd point out that I show, in my newsreader, 319 posts > >> to alt.religion.bahai over the last month (July 27 to Aug.26, 1997). > >> I think this count is low, since I have deleted some of the messages > >> from my reader. This works out to an average of ten posts per day, > >> roughly -- perhaps closer to 11 or 12 per day if the other messages > >> are counted. > >> > >> FYI, I show 279 posts to soc.religion.bahai in my reader during the > >> period of Aug. 5 to Aug. 26. This works out to a little over 13 posts > >> a day on average, though this may be a bit low, too. > >> > >> What's the point of this? These counts could be used as supporting > >> evidence in the (presumably) forthcoming re-proposal of > >> talk.religion.bahai. > > > >I've heard of it being done. That's one way to count, i.e., per > >month and daily traffic. How about total postings over a longer > >period of time? Say since April 1, 1997? Dejanews.com shows > >2,207 documents posted to alt.religion.bahai since then.... > >Divide by 150 (5 months of 30 days) equals 14.71 postings > >per day. > > > >If we consider talk.religion.bahai discussion, on news.groups > >and elsewhere, there are 759 messages from January 1, 1997 to > >April 1st. Divided by 90 that's 8.43 messages per day. > > > >Given the increase of use, it's reasonable to expect that > >a Big 8 unmoderated newsgroup would attract a further > >increase of postings. > > > >I think a good case can be made for steady growth of > >participation and that it would continue. > > I think you are right there Fred. This group may have had its up and > downs but I think on the whole it has justified itself. It is the best > justification for t.r.b. (BTW, what will happen to a.r.b if t.r.b comes > on line -- can it be cancelled?) Technically, I believe it would be virtually impossible to cancel it. Not that I'm in favor of doing that. I don't see any reason to cancel arb. Trb and arb can exist simultaneously, evolving along whatever lines users of them choose.... I don't see anything wrong with that. They may specialize, in a sense. There would always be people without access to the alt.* hierarchy and it may therefore be useful to have two unmoderated groups. Talk.religion.bahai might someday have an email echo, if somebody can figure that out, which would allow it to reach others with only email capabilities. > > Chris Manvell, Isle of Skye, Scotland. Tel.:+44+(0)1471-822317 > -- > NEWSGROUP READERS: Please remove SPAMGUARD from address before e-mailing. > Verily, Jesus said: "Come ye after Me, and I will make you to become > fishers of men." In this day, however, We say: "Come ye after Me, that > We may make you to become quickeners of mankind." [Baha'u'llah] > For more info goto: > , or -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Thu Aug 28 07:03:00 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Thu Aug 28 03:49:43 1997 Received: (qmail 14516 invoked from network); 28 Aug 1997 10:49:41 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.118) by hm3.hotmail.com with SMTP; 28 Aug 1997 10:49:41 -0000 Message-ID: <34055830.1A00@hotmail.com> Date: Thu, 28 Aug 1997 06:51:28 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,misc.misc,talk.religion.misc,news.admin.censorship CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Newsgroup traffic References: <3402bb02.1681488@news.zippo.com> <3402F859.93C@hotmail.com> <3404073C.7AB0@hotmail.com> <34065ef1.64792539@news.zippo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 1145 Roger Reini wrote: > > On Wed, 27 Aug 1997 06:53:48 -0400, Frederick Glaysher > wrote: > > > > >Technically, I believe it would be virtually impossible > >to cancel it. Not that I'm in favor of doing that. > >I don't see any reason to cancel arb. Trb and arb can > >exist simultaneously, evolving along whatever lines > >users of them choose.... I don't see anything wrong > >with that. They may specialize, in a sense. > > > >There would always be people without access to > >the alt.* hierarchy and it may therefore be useful to > >have two unmoderated groups. > > Personally, I'd be happy with just the two groups (srb and either arb > or trb). Following them can become time-consuming. People wouldn't have to follow all of them. They could tune in and out as they wish. Like TV! > > Let's see what happens for specialization. It should be interesting.... > > Roger (rreini@wwnet.com) > https://fp-www.wwnet.net/~rreini/ -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Tue Sep 02 08:18:15 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Sun Aug 31 13:28:59 1997 Received: (qmail 15588 invoked from network); 31 Aug 1997 20:28:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.127) by hm2.hotmail.com with SMTP; 31 Aug 1997 20:28:37 -0000 Message-ID: <3409D453.29EA@hotmail.com> Date: Sun, 31 Aug 1997 16:30:11 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,misc.misc,talk.religion.misc,news.admin.censorship CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Newsgroup traffic References: <3402bb02.1681488@news.zippo.com> <3402F859.93C@hotmail.com> <3404073C.7AB0@hotmail.com> <34065ef1.64792539@news.zippo.com> <34055830.1A00@hotmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 2149 Does anyone think there are any good ideas in this message? I'm willing to discuss any of them.... x@x.x wrote: > > In article , Chris@baha.demon.co.ukSPAMGUARD wrote: > > >I think you are right there Fred. This group may have had its up and > >downs but I think on the whole it has justified itself. It is the best > >justification for t.r.b. (BTW, what will happen to a.r.b if t.r.b comes > >on line -- can it be cancelled?) > > This is your best bet at getting a newsgroup. Just do this: > > Post the RFD and the CFV to news.groups ONLY. > > Post a pointer to the RFD that is in news.groups into all of the > various places where Fred thinks that it is O.K. to spam. Make > each one a single post (not a crosspost), set followups to news.groups, > and then (most important) dont do it again for at least 30 days. > > Carry on a conversation in news.groups that only talks about how > many people use alt.religion.bahai. > > If Fredrick comes up with more examples of what he and he alone > thinks is conspiracy, vote fraud, etc., discuss it in this group > for while, and see if you pro-TRB folks agree. If you do, have > one of you (NOT Fred) post a complaint in news.groups. Muzzle > Fredrick before he generates more no votes for your cause. > > ============================================================= > > **DO NOT** > > Let Fred take his little war to unrelated newsgroups. > > Let Fred cry conspiracy in cases like the "propagation threat" > or the "mailing list troll" where he really looks foolish. > you need real vote fraud that you can prove. > > ============================================================= > > If you all concentrate on volume of this group, there are enough > votes in news.groups for you to win. Just stop your proponent > from pissing everybody off this time, and you can win. > > Do you want a newsgroup or do you want a flame war? Choose. -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Wed Aug 27 07:48:38 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Wed Aug 27 04:02:40 1997 Received: (qmail 3293 invoked from network); 27 Aug 1997 11:02:38 -0000 Received: from ts?rh.metronet.lib.mi.us (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.20) by hm3.hotmail.com with SMTP; 27 Aug 1997 11:02:38 -0000 Message-ID: <340409B8.64A5@hotmail.com> Date: Wed, 27 Aug 1997 07:04:24 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,misc.misc,talk.religion.misc,news.admin.censorship CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Newsgroup traffic References: <3402bb02.1681488@news.zippo.com> <3402F859.93C@hotmail.com> <5tvfsk$91g$1@msunews.cl.msu.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 2719 Donald Zhang Osborn wrote: > > Chris wrote: > >I think you are right there Fred. This group may have had its up and > >downs but I think on the whole it has justified itself. It is the best > >justification for t.r.b. (BTW, what will happen to a.r.b if t.r.b comes > >on line -- can it be cancelled?) > > A few months back I wrote that I expected that in the long run there > would be more Baha'i newsgroups as part of the natural evolution of the > faith and expansion of interest in it. It may be that that long run is > already here, and a.r.b. would remain along with s.r.b. and the possible > proposed t.r.b. It would make sense to me. > > Such development would represent a challenge as well as an opportunity: > More areas for people to raise questions means more Baha'is having to spend > time to offer answers, clarifications, corrections, etc. This takes time > away from other things. In addition, it's hard to keep an open group free > of the garbage that clutters many groups (esp. alt.* ones) and detracts from > their purpose. Now why must we always react in the negative? Seriously? Those who have the interest and time for it, will. Life is full of garbage.... None of which has gone away after all these centuries.... Both would provide places for significant discussion and exchange to occur for those who want it. Ignore the rest. That's what we've been doing already, isn't it? > > Yet these fora could also provide areas where we all can develop skills > of consulting and discussing that bring out the "spark of truth" in an > atmosphere of courtesy and respect. Of course a lot of work is necessary, > as we have seen on a.r.b., but it's necessary IMHO in this world including > cyber places like Usenet. I couldn't agree more.... > > Try thinking ahead a bit. In five years - a long time in cyber terms - what > will Usenet, the web, etc. look like and where will our efforts fit in all > of that? How can our efforts on this rapidly evolving medium best serve the > cause of God, peace, unity, justice...? By providing fora where people can speak their minds without someone else judging it.... Often someone with less acumen, I might add, when it comes to the Bahai Faith.... I like the long-range vision of five years here too. That perspective is what we ought to have. Five more years of stifling what people think and telling them what they ought to think is all wrong. Yet it's become the "Bahai" way.... > > DZO -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Mon Sep 08 17:18:34 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Mon Sep 8 13:18:38 1997 Received: (qmail 9682 invoked from network); 8 Sep 1997 20:18:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.125) by hm2.hotmail.com with SMTP; 8 Sep 1997 20:18:15 -0000 Message-ID: <34145DEA.57F8@hotmail.com> Date: Mon, 08 Sep 1997 16:19:54 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: forumbahai@es.co.nz CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: newsletter & arb Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 1268 ubject: Re: alt.religion.bahai condemned in New Zealand Date: 8 Sep 1997 18:02:29 GMT From: guymacon@deltanet.com (Guy Macon) Organization: Electronics Engineer Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai, misc.misc References: 1n article <3413FB2D.4EA1@hotmail.com>, FG@hotmail.com wrote: >> o The article states, "It is advisable that any individual Baha'is setting >> up their own Web pages that refer to the Faith or its teachings should clear >> the intended Baha'i-related content with their Assembly first." This is good ammunition for getting yes votes, but qoutes from it aren't enough. We need to get the whole article posted in a newsgroup. If someone types it into a text file (no more than 70 characters per line, please) and emails it to me, I can arrange to get it published anonymously. [cut] Is there anything more beyond this quote worthwhile? I'd appreciate your emailing it to Guy, if so, at guymacon@deltanet.com Thanks. I appreciate your support and courage.... -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Fri Aug 01 08:32:47 1997 >From ksm8p@avery.med.virginia.edu Thu Jul 31 14:13:06 1997 Received: from avery.med.virginia.edu by mail.virginia.edu id aa17742; 31 Jul 97 14:10 EDT Received: (from ksm8p@localhost) by avery.med.Virginia.EDU (8.8.5/8.6.6) id OAA20138 for FG@hotmail.com; Thu, 31 Jul 1997 14:10:11 -0400 From: Kavian Sadeghzade Milani Message-Id: <199707311810.OAA20138@avery.med.Virginia.EDU> Subject: Non-sense To: FG@hotmail.com Date: Thu, 31 Jul 1997 14:10:11 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 689 Dear Mr. Glaysher, This email is between you and I and I humbly request that it remain between the two of us. What is the nature of this dislike for Persian Baha'is or Baha'is in general? Has your soul not been touched with the heat of the Revelation. Has not the rust of the soul been rubbed off with the burnish of the word of God? I feel your pain and I want to experience it with you. Please, let me into your concerns. I was born in Chicago but have lived in Iran for a few years, in between. I remain very interested in your thought. Warmest Regards, Kavian Of course, you understand that I ask that this be confidential. Otherwise I prefer that you should not reply. From - Sun Jun 01 10:54:29 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Sun Jun 1 07:24:17 1997 Received: (qmail 4725 invoked from network); 1 Jun 1997 14:24:13 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.126) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 1 Jun 1997 14:24:13 -0000 Message-ID: <3391864E.19DE@hotmail.com> Date: Sun, 01 Jun 1997 10:25:18 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,misc.misc,talk.religion.misc CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Notarius References: <199705302344.QAA05824@fat.doobie.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 3913 Huge Cajones Remailer wrote: > > Frederick, > > there was a song "Mount your Steeds, Oh Heroes of God". > And "Hearken my brother and I will sing thee a lovely tune and a lovely melody". > I thought you understood the reference. > I then asked Roger for the name of the band that made the songs. > They were popular long ago. > It was a Bahai group. They're mostly popular trash, as far as I'm concerned.... I never listen to any of them.... > > Notarius account is a nym account. I am surprised that you wonder > why I use it. Take a look in alt.religion.scientology, > there used to be many of them there. What's a "nym" account? I'm not interested in scientology either.... The word NOTS is understood by everybody > in a.r.s. Define it for us here on alt.religion.bahai, please.... > The internic put the domain on hold, which created problems for many users. Kindly define "internic." > This place is backwards. I call it Buchara. > If I came forward I would have problems. > I am not posting from bcca.org. Prove it by coming forward.... What are you hiding for or from? > > I give you all the credit for creating and maintaining this > newsgroup. You are misinterpreting me. > As for my motives, I wanted to assist you so that you were not alone. I'm accustomed to it and haven't lost my marbles yet.... If I'm "misinterpreting" you, please persuade me otherwise.... What's your real name? Where are you posting from? Haifa? > Free speech needs all the help it can get. Call me a doubting Thomas, but I'm not sure you're sincere.... > > In all my postings I have tried to be honest. > Some articles were intended to be funny. I hope I'm not a humorless fanatic myself, but some of them are intimating things perhaps none too funny.... If you are honest, why hide your identity, in this highly charged context? > > Fredericks wrote: > Notarius wrote: > > > > > > Frederick, > > > I have got to talk with you off the list. > > > We have been outspoken. With all right, I should add. > > > But we are being shunned and there are very few posts. > > I count over 500 now since early April on www.dejanews.com > > and www.reference.com under alt.religion.bahai > > > I will probably not post for a couple of days. > > > We cant keep the newsgroup going all by ourselves. > > "We" aren't, Notarius. By the way, what's your real name? > > > Some people would love to hear me say that, but I dont want to > > > give them the satisfaction. Thats why I take this to private email. > > You needn't be squeamish.... I've been saying all along that > > many people who voted YES, 157, have been shut out of the > > discussion. I've received numerous email messages from some of > > them trying to get access.... THEY already have that > > satisfaction and know it.... > > > Its too bad that we are both technodummies. > > > We need help and I dont know where to look for it. > > > My Spanish is bad and I cant set up the list. This is a nymaccount, > > > as you are probably aware of. > > > > > > You dropped a bomb when you wrote about the coverups in Wilmette. > > > Is Roger on the NSA? He just disappeared. Everybody disappeared, > > > though I "hear" Donald grinding his teeth. > > No bombs.... Just what appears to my conscience as the truth.... > > I may be wrong.... I concede once again that I'm not perfect.... > > Who are you and what's your motives.... Why are you hiding > > behind an alias.... Are you posting from bcca.org? > > I've been to Buchara.... It's a backward little hole in the > > ground.... > > > > > > Notarius > > -- > > Frederick Glaysher > > UseNet: alt.religion.bahai -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Mon Jun 02 07:25:55 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Mon Jun 2 03:32:01 1997 Received: (qmail 11890 invoked from network); 2 Jun 1997 10:32:00 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.117) by hm1.hotmail.com with SMTP; 2 Jun 1997 10:32:00 -0000 Message-ID: <3392A16D.2000@hotmail.com> Date: Mon, 02 Jun 1997 06:33:17 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,misc.misc,talk.religion.misc CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Notarius References: <199705302344.QAA05824@fat.doobie.com> <339095fd.15980913@news.wwnet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 1019 Roger Reini wrote: > > On Fri, 30 May 1997 16:44:01 -0700, nobody@huge.cajones.com (Huge > Cajones Remailer) wrote: > > >there was a song "Mount your Steeds, Oh Heroes of God". > >And "Hearken my brother and I will sing thee a lovely tune and a lovely melody". > >I thought you understood the reference. > >I then asked Roger for the name of the band that made the songs. > >They were popular long ago. > >It was a Bahai group. > > Sorry, I can't help you with those songs. I haven't been a Baha'i for > that long (3 years), and I'm not familiar with those songs. This explains an awful lot to me, Roger. You're still in the breathless, enthusiastic stage of Bahai development.... I hope you can recover the ability to begin thinking for yourself again someday.... No disrespect intended.... It's just all so typical of many people when they first enter the Bahai Faith.... > > Roger (rreini@wwnet.com) > https://www.wwnet.com/~rreini/ -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Thu Jun 12 07:06:35 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Thu Jun 12 03:26:11 1997 Received: (qmail 7674 invoked from network); 12 Jun 1997 10:26:10 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.121) by hm3.hotmail.com with SMTP; 12 Jun 1997 10:26:10 -0000 Message-ID: <339FCF13.6C6@hotmail.com> Date: Thu, 12 Jun 1997 06:27:31 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: soc.culture.iranian,alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Opposing Bahai site-New!!!! References: <865628829.4837@dejanews.com> <5nmm2e$cui$1@news2.i-2000.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 522 Harry Duran wrote: [clip] > > Burning books? Holy war? The Bab enjoined on his followers what > contemporary Bahais consider to be among the worst of religious ideals. I think you're quite right about the Bab enjoining book burning and jihad on his fanatical followers.... I've always found the suppression of these facts the most revolting distortions of Babi history.... And wasn't Baha'u'llah a gun-runner at Fort Tabarsi? [clip] > > Harry -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Wed Sep 03 17:28:13 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Wed Sep 3 05:47:31 1997 Received: (qmail 12106 invoked from network); 3 Sep 1997 12:47:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.124) by hm3.hotmail.com with SMTP; 3 Sep 1997 12:47:04 -0000 Message-ID: <340D5CA9.4357@hotmail.com> Date: Wed, 03 Sep 1997 08:48:41 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Paranoia at SRB Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 1264 Subject: Re: Hypocrisy Date: Tue, 2 Sep 1997 11:20:22 -0600 From: "Rick Boatright" Organization: Topeka Business Computers To: Frederick Glaysher CC: srb-mods@bcca.org Frederick, this was posted, and we'll continue to post them, of course, since it would be indeed hypocritical of us to not post your quotations which you appear to be posting solely so that you can include the advertisement for ARB in your signature. FRANKLY, THE THOUGHT HAD NEVER OCCURRED TO ME.... Rick Boatright co-moderator soc.religion.bahai > "Say: Honesty, virtue, wisdom and a saintly character > redound to the exaltation of man, while dishonesty, > imposture, ignorance and hypocrisy lead to his > abasement." > > Baha'u'llah, Tablets of Baha'u'llah, 57. > > -- > Frederick Glaysher > UseNet: alt.religion.bahai > Ask your ISP to add it; also available on > www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. > -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai Ask your ISP to add it; also available on www.dejanews.com, www.reference.com, and www.zippo.com. From - Sun Sep 07 07:41:59 1997 >From bn872@freenet.carleton.ca Sat Sep 6 04:03:00 1997 Received: from freenet5.carleton.ca.carleton.ca (bn872@freenet5.carleton.ca [134.117.136.25]) by freenet1.carleton.ca (8.8.6/8.8.6) with ESMTP id HAA08441 for ; Sat, 6 Sep 1997 07:03:21 -0400 (EDT) Received: (bn872@localhost) by freenet5.carleton.ca.carleton.ca (8.8.5/NCF-Sun-Client) id HAA03695; Sat, 6 Sep 1997 07:03:20 -0400 (EDT) Date: Sat, 6 Sep 1997 07:03:20 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <199709061103.HAA03695@freenet5.carleton.ca.carleton.ca> From: bn872@freenet.carleton.ca (McKenny Michael) To: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Personal I'm Sending You a Censored Document Reply-To: bn872@freenet.carleton.ca X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 670 Greetings, Frederick. I'm forwarding you, as four separate posts, a copy of the censored Service of Women Paper. This has just been posted to Bahai-st, Talisman and irfan. I hope you will place it on alt.religion.bahai, and on any other newsgroup you deem appropriate. I would be grateful if you keep me informed of which newsgroups etc. you send it to. May this find you very well, and may that long be so. Peace, Michael -- "My name's McKenny, Mike McKenny, Warrant Officer, Solar Guard." (Tom Corbett #1 STAND BY FOR MARS p2) From - Sat Aug 16 06:19:32 1997 >From fran@schubert.crhc.uiuc.edu Fri Aug 15 13:39:33 1997 Received: (from fran@localhost) by schubert.crhc.uiuc.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id PAA12476; Fri, 15 Aug 1997 15:43:21 -0500 (CDT) Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 15:43:21 -0500 (CDT) From: Fran Baker Message-Id: <199708152043.PAA12476@schubert.crhc.uiuc.edu> To: FG@hotmail.com Subject: please, one more Cc: fran@schubert.crhc.uiuc.edu Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-MD5: OiurKb/c3gA0dn3p0k7FjA== X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 2074 Fred, One more. I owe you!! Fran > > Article not accepted by server; not posted. > Postings to "soc.religion.bahai" are not allowed here./usr/local/lib/nn/inews failed > > Your response has been saved in ~/dead.letter > > Your article follows: > Newsgroups: soc.religion.bahai > Subject: Re: Can you trust an atheist? > References: <"hPjm4.A.7VF.fYI9z"@bounty> > > "Dr. Hops" writes: > > >Hello Jean, > >I personally would have nothing to do with an atheists. I don't no, > >it's just my feelings on the matter. I may be wrong for this but now > >that I know there is something said of this from Bahaullah it confirms > >my thinking even more that I should stay away from that area. It's hard > >enough trying to teach or deal with people who believe in God. I would > >continue to teach the wife if she's Baha'i but would stay away from the > >husband completely. No, I don't think you can trust an Atheist. > >Debra/Los Angeles > > > > Oh, yes, well > you can't really trust or have as a spiritual partner > someone who doesn't believe in God; why, that > might just leave you with someone who loves justice for > its own sake...how impossible! how inferior! How can > the guy even begin to know what is right? From > reading history, philosophy, novels, poetry, other scriptures, scientific > writings, the newspaper? from listening to music, to other people? > from his experience, his gut, the example of his teachers or parents? > By thinking about consequences? By thinking ethics is about not making > yourself a special case or about having a good will rather than blind > obedience or "fear of God"? (I've always wondered what was so > morally admirable about being honest, etc., out of fear.) > And to top it all off, he's bound to change > his mind along life's journey! That's scary stuff. Life is hard enough. > > Sorry for the sarcasm, but shunning freethinkers and atheists > is such a pathetic and unworthy thing to do. As a Baha'i you > should be above it. > From - Sat Aug 16 06:19:30 1997 >From fran@schubert.crhc.uiuc.edu Fri Aug 15 13:38:15 1997 Received: (from fran@localhost) by schubert.crhc.uiuc.edu (8.7.5/8.7.3) id PAA12473; Fri, 15 Aug 1997 15:41:58 -0500 (CDT) Date: Fri, 15 Aug 1997 15:41:58 -0500 (CDT) From: Fran Baker Message-Id: <199708152041.PAA12473@schubert.crhc.uiuc.edu> To: FG@hotmail.com Subject: please, please Cc: fran@schubert.crhc.uiuc.edu Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-MD5: YGKcDFAKxGgYu0HhWaAveQ== X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 1396 Fred, Can you please post this on SRB for me. I'm sorry to impose, but I need your help for the time being. Thanks, Fran > Article not accepted by server; not posted. > Postings to "soc.religion.bahai" are not allowed here./usr/local/lib/nn/inews failed > > Your response has been saved in ~/dead.letter > > Your article follows: > Newsgroups: soc.religion.bahai > Subject: Re: Can you trust an atheist? > References: <"9luH7D.A.pRF.EWI9z"@bounty> > > "Carl Allen Brehmer" writes: > > > > > " Know thou for a certainty that whoso disbelieveth > >in God is neither trustworthy nor truthful. This, indeed, > >is the truth, the undoubted truth. He that > >acteth treacherously towards God will, also, act > >treacherously towards his king. Nothing whatever can > >deter such a man from evil, nothing can hinder him > >from betraying his neighbor, nothing can induce > >him to walk uprightly." Gleanings p.232-233 > > >Carl > > This is a flagrantly ignorant and/or self-serving pronouncement. > The only grain of truth here is that someone > who is dishonest in one sphere is likely to be > dishonest in another, but this does not lead to the > conclusion in the first sentence, which makes many > other, far more debatable assumptions, e.g., not believing > in God is treachery toward God. > > Fran > From - Thu Jun 12 05:53:44 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Wed Jun 11 03:24:00 1997 Received: (qmail 14777 invoked from network); 11 Jun 1997 10:23:59 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.119) by hm2.hotmail.com with SMTP; 11 Jun 1997 10:23:59 -0000 Message-ID: <339E7D11.778F@hotmail.com> Date: Wed, 11 Jun 1997 06:25:21 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai,misc.misc Subject: posting test of ftp.louisa.net Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 140 If you're reading this, it works for reading and posting to alt.religion.bahai.... -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Thu Jun 26 07:12:08 1997 >From news@lana.zippo.com Wed Jun 25 04:08:01 1997 Received: (from news@localhost) by lana.zippo.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id EAA24415; Wed, 25 Jun 1997 04:07:59 -0700 (PDT) To: srb@bcca.org Path: newsp.zippo.com!news2 From: FG Newsgroups: soc.religion.bahai Subject: Posting to alt.religion.bahai Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 07:09:26 -0400 Organization: None Lines: 8 Message-ID: <33B0FC66.1500@hotmail.com> Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com NNTP-Posting-Host: glaysher@199.179.42.20 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) CC: FG@hotmail.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 238 Some readers of soc.religion.bahai might find it helpful to know that posting to alt.religion.bahai is now possible through www.dejanews.com, which also archives both newsgroups. -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Thu Jun 26 07:12:09 1997 >From blimber@capaccess.org Wed Jun 25 18:36:16 1997 Received: (from blimber@localhost) by cap1.CapAccess.org (8.6.12/8.6.10) id VAA14575; Wed, 25 Jun 1997 21:41:31 -0400 Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 21:41:30 -0400 (EDT) From: Bruce Limber To: Frederick Glaysher Subject: Re: Posting to alt.religion.bahai In-Reply-To: <5orhav$sm7@itchy.serv.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 420 > Some readers of soc.religion.bahai might find it > helpful to know that posting to alt.religion.bahai > is now possible through www.dejanews.com, which > also archives both newsgroups. I think you can give it a rest now. We're already well aware that all the antis are over there on the alt group, and most of us remain far more confident of the Baha'i administrative order than, apparently, do you. From - Thu Jun 26 07:12:08 1997 >From news@lana.zippo.com Wed Jun 25 04:08:01 1997 Received: (from news@localhost) by lana.zippo.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) id EAA24415; Wed, 25 Jun 1997 04:07:59 -0700 (PDT) To: srb@bcca.org Path: newsp.zippo.com!news2 From: FG Newsgroups: soc.religion.bahai Subject: Posting to alt.religion.bahai Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 07:09:26 -0400 Organization: None Lines: 8 Message-ID: <33B0FC66.1500@hotmail.com> Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com NNTP-Posting-Host: glaysher@199.179.42.20 Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) CC: FG@hotmail.com X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 238 Some readers of soc.religion.bahai might find it helpful to know that posting to alt.religion.bahai is now possible through www.dejanews.com, which also archives both newsgroups. -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Thu Jun 26 07:12:06 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Wed Jun 25 04:08:02 1997 Received: (qmail 7259 invoked from network); 25 Jun 1997 11:08:01 -0000 Received: from ts?rh.metronet.lib.mi.us (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.20) by hm3.hotmail.com with SMTP; 25 Jun 1997 11:08:01 -0000 Message-ID: <33B0FC66.1500@hotmail.com> Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 07:09:26 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: soc.religion.bahai CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Posting to alt.religion.bahai Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0004 Content-Length: 238 Some readers of soc.religion.bahai might find it helpful to know that posting to alt.religion.bahai is now possible through www.dejanews.com, which also archives both newsgroups. -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Thu Jun 26 07:12:09 1997 >From blimber@capaccess.org Wed Jun 25 18:36:16 1997 Received: (from blimber@localhost) by cap1.CapAccess.org (8.6.12/8.6.10) id VAA14575; Wed, 25 Jun 1997 21:41:31 -0400 Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 21:41:30 -0400 (EDT) From: Bruce Limber To: Frederick Glaysher Subject: Re: Posting to alt.religion.bahai In-Reply-To: <5orhav$sm7@itchy.serv.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 420 > Some readers of soc.religion.bahai might find it > helpful to know that posting to alt.religion.bahai > is now possible through www.dejanews.com, which > also archives both newsgroups. I think you can give it a rest now. We're already well aware that all the antis are over there on the alt group, and most of us remain far more confident of the Baha'i administrative order than, apparently, do you. From - Thu Jul 10 06:26:32 1997 >From djensen@shell9.ba.best.com Wed Jul 9 08:31:21 1997 Received: (from djensen@localhost) by shell9.ba.best.com (8.8.5/8.7.3) id IAA24853; Wed, 9 Jul 1997 08:31:20 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 9 Jul 1997 08:31:20 -0700 (PDT) From: Dan Jensen Message-Id: <199707091531.IAA24853@shell9.ba.best.com> To: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Propoganda? Newsgroups: alt.religion.bahai In-Reply-To: <33B8E5A6.311B@hotmail.com> References: <19970618045000.AAA11977@ladder02.news.aol.com> <866643217.5494@dejanews.com> <01bc7bf8$44158c60$7044c280@nader.tamu.edu> <866666093.28553@dejanews.com> <01bc7c38$7e420540$7044c280@nader.tamu.edu> <5oeofp$cn0$1@orthanc.reference.com> <01bc7f2c$347e1ce0$a5e893cf@oemcomputer> <867173093.29149@dejanews.com> <01bc80e6$53cb5840$7cda169d@afshar.sfsymphony.org> <33B4ECD7.2F66@hotmail.com> <33b54269.294088@news.online.no> <33B632B 9.56F2@hotmail.com> <867716274.3061@dejanews.com> <33B86755.4E526CB7@interport.net> Organization: Best Internet Communications, Inc. - 415 964 BEST Cc: jensen@atlas.arc.nasa.gov Bcc: Wow, there are some ANGRY folks on this newsgroup! Let me tell you, I am an ex-Baha'i. I had a pretty good life as a Baha'i; don't get me wrong. I studied Arabic for awhile, and I worked at the Baha'i World Centre in Israel. I left the Baha'i Faith primarily for the same reason I rejected other religions as a Baha'i; I don't think the Baha'i Faith is any better or worse than other faiths. I just had to follow my soul. That being said, I have witnessed ugly power struggles in Baha'i communities, I have been sexually molested at a Baha'i institute, and I have watched an upstanding Baha'i use Baha'i scripture to help him seduce my friend's wife. I also have been sensored on occasion by SRB, for what I think were weak reasons. I still don't think the Baha'i Faith is any worse than any other faith. I've seen some fairly controversial messages archived by SRB, but I wouldn't be surprised if they trim the least "desirable" postings off of their archives on occasion. I don't think it's the worst case of censorship in the world, but this is beside my point. Newsgroups like alt.religion.bahai can be used for a more free discussion of the Baha'i Faith, but this one is so chaotic and full of name calling that I would prefer that it be moderated by a non-Baha'i, non-Muslim group. ... certainly not by me! ;-) Ciao, dan From - Sun Jun 29 05:50:54 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Sat Jun 28 03:50:49 1997 Received: (qmail 20988 invoked from network); 28 Jun 1997 10:50:47 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.118) by hm3.hotmail.com with SMTP; 28 Jun 1997 10:50:47 -0000 Message-ID: <33B4ECD7.2F66@hotmail.com> Date: Sat, 28 Jun 1997 06:52:07 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: soc.culture.iranian,alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc,soc.rights.human,soc.culture.israel CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: The Baha'i Faith References: <01bc7b1f$267d9be0$LocalHost@rayden> <19970618045000.AAA11977@ladder02.news.aol.com> <866643217.5494@dejanews.com> <01bc7bf8$44158c60$7044c280@nader.tamu.edu> <866666093.28553@dejanews.com> <01bc7c38$7e420540$7044c280@nader.tamu.edu> <5oeofp$cn0$1@orthanc.reference.com> <01bc7f2c$347e1ce0$a5e893cf@oemcomputer> <867173093.29149@dejanews.com> <01bc80e6$53cb5840$7cda169d@afshar.sfsymphony.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 1239 webmaster wrote: > > [................] > > > LONG LIVE IRAN... LONG LIVE FRONTIERS OF IRAN... DOWN WITH IRAN > ANTAGONIST > > ANARCHISTS... > > > > > > webmaster@iranvision.com > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Iran Culture and Information Center > > https://www.IranVision.com > > Established January 1997 > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > > News - Chat - Weather - Art - Pictures - Poetry - Music - Forum - Games > > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > > IRAN: (old: Persia) n: Land of Aryans (nobles, pure

) Desperado wrote: > Funny how Fascism, and racism always hide behind nationalism. Yes LONG LIVE > IRAN, and every democratic minded Iranian who can listen to the opposing > ideas without resorting to violence. You've touched on exactly what's one of the major problems with the Bahai Faith. Although violence probably isn't usually resorted to, there's absolutely no tolerance among Iranian Bahais for any views but their own.... After all, they're Peeeersian.... No decadent democracy there.... -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Sun Jun 29 07:07:40 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Sun Jun 29 03:01:11 1997 Received: (qmail 27472 invoked from network); 29 Jun 1997 10:01:09 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.119) by hm3.hotmail.com with SMTP; 29 Jun 1997 10:01:09 -0000 Message-ID: <33B632B9.56F2@hotmail.com> Date: Sun, 29 Jun 1997 06:02:33 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: soc.culture.iranian,alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc,soc.rights.human,soc.culture.israel CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: The Baha'i Faith References: <19970618045000.AAA11977@ladder02.news.aol.com> <866643217.5494@dejanews.com> <01bc7bf8$44158c60$7044c280@nader.tamu.edu> <866666093.28553@dejanews.com> <01bc7c38$7e420540$7044c280@nader.tamu.edu> <5oeofp$cn0$1@orthanc.reference.com> <01bc7f2c$347e1ce0$a5e893cf@oemcomputer> <867173093.29149@dejanews.com> <01bc80e6$53cb5840$7cda169d@afshar.sfsymphony.org> <33B4ECD7.2F66@hotmail.com> <33b54269.294088@news.online.no> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 3724 Hallaj wrote: > > On Sat, 28 Jun 1997 06:52:07 -0400, Frederick Glaysher > wrote: > > >webmaster wrote: > >> > >> [................] > >> > >> > LONG LIVE IRAN... LONG LIVE FRONTIERS OF IRAN... DOWN WITH IRAN > >> ANTAGONIST > >> > ANARCHISTS... > >> > > >> > > >> > webmaster@iranvision.com > >> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > Iran Culture and Information Center > >> > https://www.IranVision.com > >> > Established January 1997 > >> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > News - Chat - Weather - Art - Pictures - Poetry - Music - Forum - Games > >> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------- > >> > IRAN: (old: Persia) n: Land of Aryans (nobles, pure

) > > > > > >Desperado wrote: > >> Funny how Fascism, and racism always hide behind nationalism. Yes LONG LIVE > >> IRAN, and every democratic minded Iranian who can listen to the opposing > >> ideas without resorting to violence. > > > >You've touched on exactly what's one of the major problems with the > >Bahai Faith. Although violence probably isn't usually resorted to, > >there's absolutely no tolerance among Iranian Bahais for any views > >but their own.... After all, they're Peeeersian.... No decadent > >democracy there.... > > > >-- > >Frederick Glaysher > >UseNet: alt.religion.bahai > > har dam az in bAq bari miresad > tAzeh tar az tAzeh tari miresad. > > If we suppose you are right. I mean if really Iranian Baha'is have no > tolerance for any opposing view, then what type of religion is this? > If we suppose the Baha'i faith as the latest religion which claims to > be forefront of humanitarian efforts, the religion of modern age and > so on it should have enough strength to learn it's followers to be > tolerants. But according to you it has failed when it concerns it's > founders and first followers. > > You dislike Iranians and it gets a racistic form sometimes. One > example is this. You say to be Persian is synonymous with being > intolerant. Where have you learned to think like this? In Baha'i > school? Is racism the message of your religion? >From 20 years of observing Iranian Bahais operate.... Yes, it's the same in Bahai "schools" too.... Worse, umitigated indoctrination and propaganda are force-fed in those "noble" institutions.... I long ago decided, as many Bahais have, never to take my sons anywhere near one of them.... Racism is the message implicit in the thinking and "teaching" of the Iranian Bahais.... It's inescapable to conclude otherwise, in my opinion. I myself don't feel racism against the culture itself, in a sense, but do not admire its penchant towards oppression and coercion of others.... i.e., profound lack of respect for freedom of religious conscience and individual liberty.... > > You claim Iranian Bahai's are intolerants because they are Persians. > Needless to say that this sentence of yours shows how ignorant you are > when it concerns Iran. Iran is a land with several different > ethnicities. Iranian Baha'is come from different parts of the country > and therefore not all of them are persians. But again if we suppose > you are right. I mean if being persian hinders one to be tolerant then > conclusion is that my great ethnicity (Persian) is stronger than > Baha'i faith. Thanks. Personally, I wouldn't conclude that either, having followed the news these many years since spending a year of my life studying Farsi back in 1979-1980.... > > Hallaj > > Persian and tolerant -- Frederick Glaysher UseNet: alt.religion.bahai From - Tue Jul 01 07:39:00 1997 >From FG@hotmail.com Tue Jul 1 04:10:08 1997 Received: (qmail 28665 invoked from network); 1 Jul 1997 11:09:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO glaysher) (199.179.42.119) by hm2.hotmail.com with SMTP; 1 Jul 1997 11:09:04 -0000 Message-ID: <33B8E5A6.311B@hotmail.com> Date: Tue, 01 Jul 1997 07:10:30 -0400 From: FG Reply-To: FG@hotmail.com X-Mailer: Mozilla 3.0Gold (Win95; U) MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: soc.culture.iranian,alt.religion.bahai,talk.religion.misc,soc.rights.human,soc.culture.israel CC: FG@hotmail.com Subject: Re: Propoganda? References: <19970618045000.AAA11977@ladder02.news.aol.com> <866643217.5494@dejanews.com> <01bc7bf8$44158c60$7044c280@nader.tamu.edu> <866666093.28553@dejanews.com> <01bc7c38$7e420540$7044c280@nader.tamu.edu> <5oeofp$cn0$1@orthanc.reference.com> <01bc7f2c$347e1ce0$a5e893cf@oemcomputer> <867173093.29149@dejanews.com> <01bc80e6$53cb5840$7cda169d@afshar.sfsymphony.org> <33B4ECD7.2F66@hotmail.com> <33b54269.294088@news.online.no> <33B632B9.56F2@hotmail.com> <867716274.3061@dejanews.com> <33B86755.4E526CB7@interport.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Mozilla-Status: 0014 Content-Length: 9984 faryar wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If we suppose you are right. I mean if really Iranian Baha'is have no > > > > tolerance for any opposing view, then what type of religion is this? > > > > If we suppose the Baha'i faith as the latest religion which claims to > > > > be forefront of humanitarian efforts, the religion of modern age and > > > > so on it should have enough strength to learn it's followers to be > > > > tolerants. But according to you it has failed when it concerns it's > > > > founders and first followers. > > > > > > > > You dislike Iranians and it gets a racistic form sometimes. One > > > > example is this. You say to be Persian is synonymous with being > > > > intolerant. Where have you learned to think like this? In Baha'i > > > > school? Is racism the message of your religion? > > > > > > From 20 years of observing Iranian Bahais operate.... Yes, it's > > > the same in Bahai "schools" too.... Worse, umitigated > > > indoctrination and propaganda are force-fed in those "noble" > > > institutions.... I long ago decided, as many Bahais have, never > > > to take my sons anywhere near one of them.... Racism is the > > > message implicit in the thinking and "teaching" of the Iranian > > > Bahais.... It's inescapable to conclude otherwise, in my > > > opinion. I myself don't feel racism against the culture itself, > > > in a sense, but do not admire its penchant towards oppression > > > and coercion of others.... i.e., profound lack of respect for > > > freedom of religious conscience and individual liberty.... > > > > > > > > > > > You claim Iranian Bahai's are intolerants because they are Persians. > > > > Needless to say that this sentence of yours shows how ignorant you are > > > > when it concerns Iran. Iran is a land with several different > > > > ethnicities. Iranian Baha'is come from different parts of the country > > > > and therefore not all of them are persians. But again if we suppose > > > > you are right. I mean if being persian hinders one to be tolerant then > > > > conclusion is that my great ethnicity (Persian) is stronger than > > > > Baha'i faith. Thanks. > > > > > > Personally, I wouldn't conclude that either, having followed the news > > > these many years since spending a year of my life studying Farsi back > > > in 1979-1980.... > > > > > > > > > > > Hallaj > > > > > > > > Persian and tolerant > > > > > > -- > > > Frederick Glaysher > > > UseNet: alt.religion.bahai > > > > Dear Mr. Glaysher; > > > > Did it ever occur to you that Iranian Bahais are intolerable of > > opposition and discussions against Bahaism because they are "Bahais" and > > not because they are "Iranian"? I mean a simple examination of posting by > > Bahais (none-Iranian) and Non-Bahai Iranians revealed to me that Iranians > > in general are open minded and very tolerant people. On SCI for instance, > > with exception of few, most Iranians have responded in a tolerable and > > clever fassion to postings full of hatred and nonesense against Iranians. > > On the other hand when I look at Bahai postings, Iranina and none > > Iranian, I come to a conclusion that they are intolerable of any > > criticism in general, if not impolite and rude at times. > > > > Take Mr. Afrashteh's postings for instance. He is an Iranian, whose site > > examines Bahai claims in a fair and polite fassion. He has given an > > enlightning prespective regarding Bahai faith and history in his site. > > While similra sites of Bahais are usually leaflet-like propaganda. Mr. > > Afrashteh's responses to insults and labellings against him on SCI by > > Bahais has been commendable, while Bahais (of Iranian and none Iranian > > origin) have used every method including threats, death wishes, insults > > and labelling to rid of him. Mr. Afrashteh is an Iranian, as obvious by > > the name. > > > > Now tell me this. Is it not that the intollerance by Iranian-Bahais is > > result of their Bahai side and not Iranian side? After all it was mainly > > non-Iranian and Iranian Bahais who stood against a free unmoderated Bahai > > newsgroup, not "Iranians" right? > > > > It is easy to point a finger at others, and Iranians in particular and > > blame all your problems on them. The facts is, that Bahaism, is a cult > > with failed ideas and it stems from itself and not from Iran. > > > > Simply not true... > Bahais have in general have tried to answer all the nonsensical accuasations thrown at them in a > diginfied way...In comparison with the traditional bigoted attitude of some whom the very mention of > Bahai brings out the worst in their nature....they have been rather patient, but firm in their > response. It seems to me Bahais, especially Iranians, have been very bigoted in their attitudes towards Western culture and are no better really than the worst bigots you refer to.... > > There are exceptions of those whose names we see as regulars, who profess to be Bahais or ex > Bahais.. > Lets start with the The Ex... > One partcular gentleman who wrote in one email that as he said had been a Bahai for over 20 years > and believed the principles of the Bahai faith and ; at their center the elimination of all > prejudice; this gentleman is found bad mouthing Iranian Bahais calling them revolting and so on.... I've been a member of the Bahai Faith for over twenty-one years, and I find most Iranian Bahais of my acquaitance revolting.... oppressive.... narrow-minded.... racist.... bigoted.... intolerant.... parasitical on a culture to which they owe everything and have no respect for.... > Is the name Bahai, Moslem or Iranian a name and should we not judge by action and deeds rather than > a name....? I'm judging by many, many actions I've WITNESSED with my own eyes.... > The question is, is this gentleman and his actions or those he criticises outside the bounds of > Bahai teachings? > Why has he dicarded his belief in elimination of prejudice etc etc and chosen to go against the very > thing he believed for all those years? could it be a badly hurt ego, just because a majority voted > not to have their sacred beliefs to be discussed in an unprotected and a potential cesspool of forum > where nothing is sacred. Oh! Apparently I am he! We meet at last!!! > Another well known poet on SCI, calls himself a Bahai , but unfortunately is very selective as to > what he believes in its principles, especially when it comes to Islam. The writer has endured his > unkind attacks when reminding him that Bahais revere and respect Islam. In stead of your casting aspersions, can you be honest enough to use the people's name involved? > > The webmaster @ iranvision likes to call Mr afrashteh and the content of their opposition fair, > These gentleman also try to fish from muddy waters, by trying cause division; when the very basis of > their spirit and action is to spread "propoganda" in the true sense of the word, and divert others > from investigating the Bahai faith from the souce. For example: > They expect a "seeker" to go to them for the "truth"....not unlike expecting the seeker at the time > of Islam to go to the crusaders who had come to fight the "Infidel" Muslims. > Even the information contained in their site is fraught with repeated cliches written by badly > informed writers at the beginning of the century... > How many times have you seen people not know the difference between The Bab, Baha'u'llah and Abdul > baha?.....You have heard my favourite...Calling Abdul baha a British agent in Iran...at a time when > when he was only 6 years old. One write even called him a Russian spy. > How many time have you heard that Bahais were made by the British? > name one respected author or publication that holds that view to day? > > They criticise Us for "propoganda type material" on the Web. > Just what is propoganda...? > in my view, propaganda is the publcation or broadcast of material based on a lie and a desire to > mislead the public to further a political or personal cause. Exactly the definition that fits soc.religion.bahai at times.... > The Nazis were masters of propoganda... And so are some Bahais.... > Hitler and Goebels (the Nazi info minisdter) through propaganda led the Gerrman nation and nearly > destroyed the world, at the same time exterminated 6 million jews by calling them impure,(Najjess) > and subhuman. > How close is the resemblance between Nazi tactics and present day theocracy in Iran, as far as the > Bahai arte concerned? > I ask which part of the Bahai teachings do they find to be "propoganda."..and what is their ultimate > aim? > Do the Bahais want to conquer the world? and how? > Do they speak against any one? > Are they promoting any living idol or personality, that can benefit from fame, wealth and notoriety? Let's not be naive and callow.... > > Since Bahais do not have any one partcular leader or paid clergy, just who has something to lose by > the Bahai faith gaining ground in people's hearts? The Bahai faith does have a de facto clergy, one that gets paid as much or more than some Christian clergy.... Many Bahais don't realize this.... > Do they have any political aspirations? What was the exhibition in the Rotunda of the US Capitol about a few years ago if not political aspiration? Let's not be children.... > Just what do they have to benefit from by the spread of their message? The usual: money, power, control, influence.... The things human beings have always lied, cheated, deceived, fought over.... > who benefits from the spread of their Message? Mostly Iranian Bahais.... > and how? They get to use ignorant, idealistic Americans and others in inumerable ways.... Bring their relatives over.... etc.... > > Faryar -- Frederick Glaysher