Unfortunately the exact practice that Baha’u'llah was referring to cryptically is still being practiced today in Afghanistan. You can watch the PBS domentary following the above link as well as find a brief update on the situation from this recent Washington Post article.

Image credit: Barat Ali Batoor

Societal context is important because what we might consider salacious or inappropriate today, may very well have been the norm in another society. This is not an issue of ‘morality’ because that concept is very malleable throughout history. Not too long ago, slavery was not only considered normal, it was sanctioned by the prevalent religion. In Islam we have an institutionalized form of prostitution (nikah al-mut’ah) and it is a little known fact that polygamy is possible within the Baha’i Faith.

Wakashudo and Lycurgus
I provided a brief exposition of the Sambia tribe in Papau New Guinea. But there are many other examples to draw upon to illustrate the same point. In Japan, samurai and their apprentice would enter into a “brotherhood contract” which involved homosexual physical intimacy although not exclusively so (both were able to also have relations with women). The special relationship involved much more than physical intimacy. The samurai as mentor trained his apprentice in bushido, social etiquette and they were both honor bound to each other for life.

Going back further in history we have the example of Spartans. Today they are presented in films like “300″ to be the ultimate “macho” heterosexual man but Spartan society was actually built upon institutionalized homosexuality. Lycurgus, architect of Spartan society, believed that such bonds between Spartan soldiers served to strengthen their efficiency on the battlefield. Marriage to a woman and family life was relegated to a necessary inconvenience.

The wedding night of a Spartan bride is an interesting presentation of how “normal” sexual relations have changed over time. Her hair would be cut short to resemble a man and she would be fitted in full armor before being presented to her new husband. Plutarch writes “…afterwards comes the bridegroom, in his every-day clothes, sober and composed as having supped at the common table, and, entering privately into the room where the bride lies, unites her virgin zone, and takes her to himself; and after staying some time together, he returns composedly to his own apartment, to sleep as usual with the other young men.”

Pedicabo ego vos et irrumabo
The binary distinction made today between homosexuality and heterosexuality is a recent concept. In Rome, not that far from Sparta, the gender of your sexual partner wasn’t important at all; slave-boy, or woman, all were fair game. What mattered and determined your place in society was whether you were the dominant partner or the submissive one. While today we view domination as a fetish, in ancient Rome it was the factor in categorizing people’s sexual status within a societal hierarchy.

There was no shame at all in taking a catamite as your lover as long as you were the one doing the penetrating. Likewise, fellatio or irrumatio as acts were acceptable. What determined status or shame was whether you were penetrating as the dominant or receiving as the subservient. The mouth of a high-born Roman male citizen was for noble uses like giving rousing speeches, reciting laws and philosophy and commanding armies into battle. Using it for baser purposes invited humiliation. In the patriarchal society of Rome, the most shameful sexual act a man could perform was cunnilingus. Not only would he be putting himself in the submissive position, he was being submissive to a woman! (gasp)

For more examples of the sexual mores of that time see the poems of Catullus (Carmen 16) and Martial’s Epigrams. And if you’re ever visiting Pompeii, it will be impossible to avoid the constant barrage of phallic symbols staring at you from walls, frescoes, statues, sculptures and even carved into the stone roads and sidewalks.

Meanwhile, on the other side of the world, Manchu mothers, grandmothers and nursemaids showed affection and love to the male child in their care by fellating them. Such an act was not considered sexual in nature at all and readily acceptable within their societal norms. Kissing the cheeks or face of the child however was considered sexual and therefore taboo.

The purpose of this brief walk through sexual history is not to merely titillate you dear reader with salacious stories but to point out that what you may consider to be salacious or ‘abnormal’ today was very much normal behavior in another time and place. I wonder, had Baha’u'llah been living in feudal Japan, would we now be parsing what exactly His condemnation of wakashūdo means?

Diagnosing Homosexuality
But some things are harder to change. The penchant to focus on who is the dominant continues to this day. The Turkish army allows for homosexual men to be exempt from an otherwise obligatory responsibility to their country. However, they must prove their homosexuality in a humiliating process to the satisfaction of the army. Acceptable “evidence” may consist of explicit pictures or videos of the candidate for military duty with another man. But he must be in the submissive role not the dominant to be considered ‘homosexual’.

While being openly gay or claiming to be gay in Turkey has serious social consequences, the army is concerned with false claims because there is no allowance for conscientious objectors to military service. As such it has ordered its doctors to ‘diagnose’ homosexuality. This brings us to the main point of this article: the pathology of homosexuality (or lack thereof).

One psychiatrist who was employed by the Turkish army tells the BBC: “Doctors are coming under immense pressure from their commanders to diagnose homosexuality, and they obey, even though there really are no diagnostic tools to determine sexual orientation. It is medically impossible, and not at all ethical.”

To placate their military bosses, psychiatrists working for the Turkish military use non-scientific tests like asking their subjects to draw trees, houses and interview them to see if they played with dolls when they were children.

In order to force the issue, Turkish military hospitals use the outdated 1968 DSM (from the American Psychiatric Association) to classify homosexuality as an illness and declare on the pink-colored official certificate of exemption that the person has a “psychosexual disorder (homosexuality)”.

Turkey’s minister for women and family affairs, Selma Aliye Kavaf, said in a 2010 interview: “I believe homosexuality is a biological disorder, an illness, and should be treated”.

Does that sound familiar to you? As a Baha’i, that is unfortunately quite familiar:

“To be afflicted this way is a great burden to a conscientious soul. But through the advice and help of doctors, through a strong and determined effort, and through prayer, a soul can overcome this handicap.”
Letter written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi to an individual Baha’i (March 26, 1950)

“Homosexuality is highly condemned and often a great trial and cause of suffering to a person, as a Baha’i. Any individual so afflicted must, through prayer, and any other means, seek to overcome this handicap.”
Letter written to an individual Baha’i on behalf of Shoghi Effendi (October 6, 1956)

“Baha’u'llah has spoken very strongly against this shameful sexual aberration, as He has against adultery and immoral conduct in general. We must try and help the soul to overcome them.”
Letter written to an individual Baha’i on behalf of Shoghi Effendi (October 25 1949)

These words and others like them, written on behalf of the Guardian more than 60 years ago have set the tone for the official Baha’i stance on the issue. They contain several important but implied assertions, that homosexuality:

• is ‘not normal’
• is an ‘affliction’ or ‘handicap’
• is a choice
• can be ‘overcome’
• can be ‘cured’ by doctors

Such an understanding of human sexuality accurately reflects the prevalent social norms of the 1940′s and 1950′s. Today we know in fact that none of those implicit statements are true.

The Pathology of Homosexuality
The assumption that homosexuality was related to psychopathic, paranoid, and schizoid personality disorders was widely accepted at the time of Shoghi Effendi by medical professionals. Such a diagnosis resulted in barbaric treatments which included but were not limited to: hysterectomies and estrogen injections (for lesbians), electroshock therapy, chemical castration, surgical castration, and trans-orbital lobotomies. I shudder to think of Baha’is who took the advice offered to them and availed themselves of such options.

While viewing homosexuality as having pathology was the prevalent doxa back then, it is imperative to point out that it was the social doxa that imposed itself onto the medical doxa. Scientifically there was no basis whatsoever for the medical assumption that homosexuality had a definable pathology.

The infamous Alfred Kinsey was among the first to study homosexuality. In 1948 he published a report not only showing the ‘normalcy’ of homosexuals as people but also the first evidence of the ineffectiveness of sexual conversion therapies.

But it was not until 1956 that a young woman, already an outsider for being female in the male dominated field of psychology, destroyed the widely held orthodoxy that homosexuality was a ‘disease’ with the presentation of her research at the American Psychological Association’s Annual Convention in Chicago.

Dr. Evelyn Hooker applied for and was given a grant by the NIMH in 1953 for her study. She said years later, “It was exciting because it would have been the first time anybody ever looked at this behavior and said ‘we’ll use scientific tests to determine whether or not homosexuality is pathological.’” Dr. Hooker’s research was both simple and ground breaking. She examined a group of 30 homosexuals and 30 heterosexuals with psychoanalytical surveys and the Rorschach ink-blot test.

Dr. Hooker removed all identifiable marks from the test results and to even further remove any possibility of bias sent the results to three other preeminent psychologists for analysis. One of them was Dr. Bruno Klopfer who was convinced that he would be able to tell the homosexual subjects apart from the test group of heterosexuals just from the Rorschach test. He couldn’t. In fact, none of the three could. Mental health was equally distributed among the subjects tested and homosexuals exhibited none of the widely assumed markers of mental illness.

After Dr. Hooker, many other researchers attempted to find a scientific, objective and empirical method for identifying pathology in homosexuals. They all came to the same conclusion. As a result, in 1973 the American Psychiatric Association removed homosexuality from the official Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM-II seventh printing). Today all official professional oversight organizations in the field of medicine, psychiatry and psychology from around the world have moved forward and reject the classification of homosexuality as a ‘disease’, ‘aberration’, ‘handicap’ or as having pathology.

For more on Dr. Evelyn Hooker, see this article at the Center for Research and Education on Gender and Sexuality at the San Francisco University and this article at the American Psychological Association as well as the 1992 documentary ‘Changing Our Minds: The Story of Dr. Evelyn Hooker’ narrated by Sir Patrick Stewart.

Unfortunately, the current Baha’i view is frozen in the 1950′s. If the Universal House of Justice posits that homosexuality is an ‘illness’, then the onus is on them to present evidence of its pathology. Many Baha’is who are well informed of the current medical advancements in this area have written as much to the institutions:

On the question of whether or not there is a biological predisposition to homosexuality, the letter indicates that the question is still open to dispute. In this regard, it may be important to note that while science may find that a predisposition to homosexuality is caused by genetic aberration, and in that sense may be considered “natural”, it does not follow that it is “natural” for some people to be homosexual. A comparison can be drawn with the evidence which suggests that there is a genetic flaw which produces a predisposition to alcoholism. Most people would hesitate to conclude from such evidence that a person with such a genetic aberration would be destined to become an alcoholic in spite of any efforts to the contrary. As the letter states, “The statistics which indicate that homosexuality is incurable are undoubtedly distorted by the fact that many of those who overcome the problem never speak about it in public, and others solve their problems without consulting professional counselors.” Furthermore, contrary evidence may well exist but may be overlooked by scientific reporting that is, for one reason or another, biased.
(From a memorandum prepared by the Research Department of the Universal House of Justice, 3 May 1994)

You mention recent research which indicates that there may be a genetic basis for homosexuality; you accept the Baha’i view of this matter, but you question the use of such terms as “abnormality, handicap, affliction, problem, etc.” since they can create misunderstandings. On the contrary, the House of Justice feels that just such words can be a great help to the individuals concerned. Human beings suffer from many problems, both physical and psychological. Some are the result of the individual’s own behaviour, some are caused by the circumstances in which he grew up, some are congenital. Some human beings are born blind, some suffer from incapacitating accidents or diseases. Such conditions present the individual affected, and those around him, with serious problems, and it is one of the challenges of the human condition that all those concerned should strive to overcome such problems and have understanding and sympathy for the individual so afflicted.
Letter to an individual Baha’i from the The Universal House of Justice (June 5, 1993)

You state that “homosexuals cannot be altered into heterosexuality, all such trials have failed and homosexuals remain so until the day they die.” This is a statement which is still open to dispute, and which Baha’is would question.
Letter written to the National Spiritual Assembly of the Baha’is of the United States on behalf of the Universal House of Justice (September 11, 1995)

The comparison with alcoholism betrays the incorrect assumption being made. While alcoholism has a well defined pathology as well as effective treatments, there is no grounds for a similar claim to be made for homosexuality.

But more alarming than the facile comparison to alcoholism, is the argument against the mountain of evidence that homosexuality is neither pathological nor ‘curable’. In a tragic attempt at addressing the lack of evidence that homosexuality is curable, it is claimed that there is a conspiracy of ‘biased reporting’.

One of the principles of the Baha’i Faith is the unity and harmony between religion and science. As such, the current Baha’i teachings on homosexuality, unless modified, present a serious challenge to this principle. The advancement of science has provided an incrementally richer understanding of the nature of human sexuality. No scientific evidence exists to show that homosexuality presents any pathology, either physically or psychologically. Failing to produce a pathology for homosexuality, one is forced by logic to stop classifying it as an ‘illness’ or ‘disease’. And it would be more accurate to use the analogy of “left-handedness” rather than that of “alcoholism”.

Sexual Orientation Change Efforts or “Conversion Therapy”
In medicine, before a treatment is proffered it is customary and good form to first define the pathology being targeted. No professional medical practitioner worthy of their position would put the horse before the cart.

When it comes to the issue of homosexuality though, this doesn’t seem to faze those that offer to ‘cure’ those so ‘afflicted’. There is a not so small industry of therapists claiming that they can change a person’s sexual orientation. The largest organizations are NARTH and Exodus and the most famous practitioner of this odious pseudo-science, Dr. Joseph Nicolosi, the founder of NARTH.

Nicolosi subscribes to the theory that a rift between father son causes homosexuality. There is no link between paternal relations and sexual orientation of course. Many gay men have healthy and close relationships with their fathers and many heterosexual men have terrible relationships (or none at all) with their fathers. But in any case, Nicolosi’s narrative is that boys become sexually attracted to other boys and men because of a ‘masculinity deficit’ brought about by a break-down in the father-son relationship.

Most conversion or reparative therapies rely heavily on an addiction or abuse/neglect model to both explain and fix homosexuality. This modality can even be seen in official communications from the Baha’i institutions (as above which cite a comparison to alcoholism). Such therapies are harmful not only because they inculcate in people a ‘broken’ view of themselves but they also blame the person for its ineffectiveness – this is in contrast to real medical science where if a therapy doesn’t work either in medicine or psychotherapy, the patient is not blamed.

Surprisingly, one of the persons who championed the removal of homosexuality from the DSM in 1973 also gave Nicolosi, NARTH, Exodus and the plethora of similarly misguided therapists and organizations a temporary veneer of legitimacy. In 2001 Robert Spitzer, a prominent psychiatrist, released a study of 200 men who had been selected from Nicolosi’s conversion therapy. Spitzer’s conclusion was that for a few select individuals conversion therapy worked. The ‘ex-gay movement’ took this and ran with it as legitimizing their work. Before this not one single research had supported their claims (nor since).

However, Spitzer’s research was controversial. Not just because it flew in the face of accepted scientific norms but because there were some serious and devastating weaknesses in the structure of the study itself which called into question its conclusion. For one, the sample of subjects were selected by Nicolosi as successful conversion patients. No control group was measured alongside them. The study consisted of 45-minute phone interviews with 200 individuals who had been referred to him by Nicolosi.

Spitzer was attracted to the research exactly because of its controversial nature but later acquiesced to his critics, confessing that he wished he hadn’t done it in retrospect. Among his own reflections was the fact that while Nicolosi had been doing conversion therapy for 30+ years he could only offer a handful of successful candidates: “In all the years of doing ex-gay therapy, you’d think Nicolosi would have been able to provide more success stories. He only sent me nine patients.”

Spitzer attempted to retract his work and went on the record repudiating his study: “In retrospect, I have to admit I think the critiques are largely correct…The findings can be considered evidence for what those who have undergone ex-gay therapy say about it, but nothing more.” And in a letter to the editor of the Journal of Sexual Behavior where his research was published Spitzer wrote:

The Fatal Flaw in the Study – There was no way to judge the credibility of subject reports of change in sexual orientation.

I offered several (unconvincing) reasons why it was reasonable to assume that the subject’s reports of change were credible and not self-deception or outright lying. But the simple fact is that there was no way to determine if the subject’s accounts of change were valid.

I believe I owe the gay community an apology for my study making unproven claims of the efficacy of reparative therapy. I also apologize to any gay person who wasted time and energy undergoing some form of reparative therapy because they believed that I had proven that reparative therapy works with some “highly motivated” individuals.

After many decades of operation there is not one shred of evidence that conversion therapies are effective. In fact we have overflowing evidence to the contrary. The list is too long to cite here fully so here’s one example. By now we have seen so many scandals of prominent anti-gay politicians or men who are directly involved in the ex-gay therapy movement exposed as being homosexual that we are desensitized to the shock of it. For a recap see Truth Wins Out.

Primum non nocere
Even if we decide to ignore what we have learned since the 1950′s about homosexuality not being a disease, and even if we ignore the repudiation of Spitzer’s study and insist that for some conversion therapy is effective there is one more important aspect that must not be ignored. For every treatment we must balance the perceived good with the potential bad it might inflict. Such a trade-off analysis is done by every medical professional in partnership with the person being treated. While certain treatments may be effective, they may not be pursued because they present too high a risk of negative consequences. This is the Hippocratic oath: ‘First, do no harm’.

Such considerations are vital because reparative or conversion therapies are not benign but have the potential to serious harm a person’s mental health. We have left behind the barbaric mutilations that physical interventions such as castration or lobotomies entailed. Today conversion therapies fall under the general umbrella of cognitive behavior therapy (CBT). But even if we insist against all scientific grounds that there is a small chance of success we must take into account the risk of such treatment. There are many tragic stories of people who underwent conversion treatment with devastating results.

For this reason and for the fact that there is neither a scientifically defined pathology nor treatment for homosexuality, all major health organizations around the world not only reject the classification of homosexuality as a ‘disease’ but they have guidelines which instruct their members to not engage in conversion therapies. For a full list see this wikipedia article:

American Psychiatric Association: It is possible to evaluate the theories which rationalize the conduct of “reparative” and conversion therapies. Firstly, they are at odds with the scientific position of the American Psychiatric Association which has maintained, since 1973, that homosexuality per se, is not a mental disorder. The theories of “reparative” therapists define homosexuality as either a developmental arrest, a severe form of psychopathology, or some combination of both.

American Psychological Association Task Force on Appropriate Therapeutic Responses to Sexual Orientation (PDF document)

Other American organizations critical of ‘reparative’ or conversion therpy:

• American Medical Association
• American Psychological Association
• American Counseling Association
• National Association of Social Workers
• American Academy of Pediatrics
• American Association of School Administrators
• American Federation of Teachers
• National Association of School Psychologists
• American Academy of Physician Assistants
• National Education Association

Norwegian Psychiatric Association: Homosexuality is no disorder or illness, and can therefore not be subject to treatment. A ‘treatment’ with the only aim of changing sexual orientation from homosexual to heterosexual must be regarded as ethical malpractice, and has no place in the health system.

The Australian Psychological Society acknowledges the lack of scientific evidence for the usefulness of conversion therapy, and notes that it can in fact be harmful for the individual.

World Health Organization: “sexual orientation by itself is not to be regarded as a disorder”

These official policy statements are important because they prevent health professionals from offering such treatments and protect patients. Recently a psychotherapist in the UK was found guilty of medical malpractice for attempting to treat the condition of homosexuality in one of her patients. Lesley Pilkington’s accreditation with the British Association for Counselling and Psychotherapy was suspended and she was ordered to undergo further professional training.

So to recap: there is no evidence that homosexuality is a ‘disease’, there is no evidence of an effective treatment, but there is ample evidence that attempting to change a person’s sexual orientation is dangerous.

The Dilemma for Baha’i Health Professionals
All of the above presents a challenge for Baha’i health professionals. On one hand they are academically trained and as members of an association must abide by their professional and ethical standards; and on the other hand as Baha’is they are educated from their Faith to view homosexuality as a ‘disease’ which should be treated. I do not envy them the cognitive dissonance such opposing views can inspire.

The vast majority of Baha’i health professionals deal with the dichotomy by favoring their professional and academic training. A few however choose to give priority to a few letters written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi 60 years ago. For example, Nossrat Peseschkian categorized homosexuality as ‘sexual disorder’ and ‘illness’.

Lynn Schrieber who has no academic or professional training gave a presentation about conversion therapy under the auspices of Baha’i institutions at the 2010 ABS Conference.

Mary K. Radpour who is active with BNASAA and a member of National Association of Social Workers engages in conversion therapy and has given numerous workshops and presentations at official Baha’i conferences and meetings.

It must be noted that the National Association of Social Workers policy statement on this issue is clearly against such treatment:

Reparative or conversion therapies claim, through the use of psychotherapy or other interventions, to eliminate a person’s sexual desire for a member of his or her own gender. The National Association of Social Workers’ National Committee on Lesbian, Gay, and Bisexual Issues (NCLGB) recognizes the emergence of these misleading therapies. Reparative and conversion therapies, sometimes called “transformational ministries,” have received wider attention against the backdrop of a growing conservative religious political climate (NASW, 1992), and through recent media campaigns supported by the Christian Coalition and the Family Research Council. By advancing their efforts through such propaganda, proponents of reparative and conversion therapies, such as the most commonly cited group NARTH, claim that their processes are supported by scientific data; however, such scientific support is replete with confounded research methodologies (Mills, 1999).

Nahzy Buck is not academically trained in this field but she has been given the podium for presentations which assert that ‘reorientation is possible and desirable’:

Finally, Dr. Chris Johnson who commented on Sonja’s blog claims to be a retired US psychotherapist who subscribes to the addiction model of homosexuality outlined above:

I am a retired Professor and psycho therapist in private practice in the U.S. I am a Baha’i who specializes in treatment of sex addictions. Homosexuality is a form of sex addiction and many gay in recovery go to 12 Step programs with Sexaholics Annoymous. I have treated many gays who want treatment through either inpatient and/or outpatient treatment plans.

The individuals who are not health professionals can be partially excused for their ignorance. While it is strange that a Baha’i is given the floor to expound on unscientific and unproven assertions which have the potential to harm those who implement them, we can understand that they are being given such an opportunity exactly because they are ‘toeing the party line’.

The individuals who are academically trained and members of a professional group not only do not have an excuse for their ignorance, they are willfully neglecting both science and the health of their patients. They risk an outcome similar to the UK psychotherapist who was sued for flagrant violations of their professional code of conduct.

Health professionals have a duty of care to not do harm, even if the patient explicitly requests it. Abiding by professional standards means explaining to the person the danger of undergoing conversion therapy, its unproven, unscientific nature and providing information of about sexual orientation coupled with counseling to help the person understand there is nothing inherently wrong with them for being attracted to the same sex. This should be the default position of all health professionals, Baha’i or otherwise.

The Scientific Method and Iterative Advancement of Knowledge
An ever advancing civilization is driven forward by two mutual forces: revelation and scientific progress. As Baha’is we believe both are equally important. When discussing the scientific view of homosexuality and the ignorance of same by the Baha’i institutions, many Baha’is point out that since science changed how it views homosexuality once, it may do so again. In their view, the harmony between science and religion will be brought about not by an adjustment by the Baha’i Faith but by science.

This betrays an ignorance of the nature of science and iterative advancement of knowledge. Science is not like a candy wrapper floating in the wind, going hither and thither, randomly landing on convictions before moving on to new ones. While science provides an evolving understanding of reality, it does so in a relatively incremental manner. Only rarely does it leap forward or smash previously held truths before replacing them with new ones.

More often than not, science builds upon itself in a slow, gradual and methodical way to propel us forward. The explanations that it provides us today can be overturned and reversed by new ones down the line but such a process is not random and it rarely reverses back on itself because once a great question is presented, examined, researched, experimented, etc. the conclusion is almost always the basis for future incremental advancement.

We can see this model of scientific advancement in such examples as germ theory, theory of relativity, climate change, evolution, etc. All of these were ‘great’ questions of their time. Many are still being resisted by those who refuse to acknowledge that within the scientific community, they are a settle matter. The question of anthropogenic climate change within US political circles is an embarrassing example of this.

It is precisely because science places a premium on empirical evidence and intellectual rigor that overturning previously established principles is so rare and valuable an occurrence. The rest of the time scientists plod along doing yeoman’s work by expanding our understanding within the established framework and widening the new horizon.

The danger here is that by not allowing science and religion to be congruent, the Baha’i Faith’s view about this important issue becomes an anachronism and damages the prestige of the Faith.

We’ve Here Before
The arguments against the granting of full rights and freedoms to homosexuals is strikingly similar to three other wrenching struggles that Western civilization already went through: slavery, women’s suffrage and racial prejudice. It is easy to forget today but for each of these hard-fought social advancements, many marshaled arguments similar to the ones we are seeing today.

But in each case the principles that underpinning the issue were the same: the oneness and equality of mankind. Both scientific evidence and religion provided a path to the same conclusion. Each of these social advancements came about gradually and reached a tipping point when a majority of people acknowledged the truth of unity and equality of mankind. History was not kind to those who were on the ‘wrong’ side. To those who ‘get it’: welcome to the new world order! To others, enjoy becoming anachronisms in the dust bin of history.

A great example of this is the Roman Catholic church’s refusal to accept science and cling to the biblical geocentric model of the universe. I’m sure you are all familiar with the shameful treatment of Galileo, one of humanity’s scientific giants. As early as 1990 Cardinal Ratzinger refused to apologize for the treatment of Galileo (357 years later). In 1992, two years after Ratzinger caused an uproar by his comments, Pope John Paul II wrote:

Thanks to his intuition as a brilliant physicist and by relying on different arguments, Galileo, who practically invented the experimental method, understood why only the sun could function as the centre of the world, as it was then known, that is to say, as a planetary system. The error of the theologians of the time, when they maintained the centrality of the Earth, was to think that our understanding of the physical world’s structure was, in some way, imposed by the literal sense of Sacred Scripture….

And in 2000 issued a full and blanket apology for the wrongs of the Catholic church in the past (including its treatment of Galileo). The example of the Catholic church in this issue and its transition from promoting geocentricism persecuting heliocentrism, to a reluctant acceptance of science shows us how damaging it is when a religious institution insists in rejecting reality. It is damaging not only to society but to the institution itself. For this and many other reasons, the Roman catholic church became a target of mockery and revulsion.

A Different Baha’i Response
So how do we reconcile a course correction as Baha’is? A good starting place is educating ourselves about the historical and etymological origins of the phrase Baha’u'llah used in the Aqdas: a specific practice of ritualized pederasty practiced in the Middle East (bache bazi). For me the key take-away is this:

By ignoring the homosexual relationships between women, which were marked by consensual agreement between adult equals, and condemning specifically a despicable act of ritualized pederasty marked by the abuse of power and dominance of an adult over less fortunate minors, was Baha’u’llah telling us more about equality, justice and human rights than about merely a sexual act or orientation?

The oft cited letters written on behalf of the Guardian need to be also taken in context. First, these were not official policy statements but responses to questions put forward by individual Baha’is seeking guidance from the one source they esteemed most highly. Although we only have the responses, it is easy to imagine how personal and painfully intimate they must have been. The answers are crafted to give ease and guidance to such individuals in their specific situation as they describe it, and it is appropriate to the possibilities offered by the society and science of that day.

Next, while reviewed, these letters were not written by Shoghi Effendi himself but by a secretary. As the Guardian, he was not able to and did not intend to create Baha’i law. It always amazes me that fellow Baha’is ignore the Administrative order and take any and every word written by a secretary on behalf of the Guardian regarding a specific personal issue to be a generally applicable Baha’i law!

The intentions of Shoghi Effendi on this topic are much less clear than suggested. The connection of that cryptic phrase from the Aqdas regarding the heinous activity of pederasty (ghelmaan and bache bazi) and homosexuality is tenuous and little understood. Supposedly it is a hand-made mark jotted down on the margin of his personal copy of the Aqdas. That’s it. Nothing more. As such it is not clear if this was meant to be a personal note, a reminder for further research, or for some other reason.

Finally, the institution of Guardianship was intended to continue after Shoghi Effendi. We all know it didn’t. But the fact that such an institution was meant to exist in parallel with the Universal House of Justice and provide continuing and evolving interpretation of Baha’i texts is a vitally important fact. If we imagine for a moment that the institution had continued, instead of lapsing with the death of Shoghi Effendi, it is not irrational to expect that a current Guardian would take into account the most up to date scientific findings when making an interpretation. The purpose of the institution of the Guardianship after all was to provide for a dynamic source of interpretation, allowing the Baha’i Faith to meet the contingent needs of society as it evolved and transformed.

Ultimately the decision of how to view homosexuality within the Baha’i Faith falls under the purview of the Universal House of Justice. They are the institution with the authority to make Baha’i law. For an example of what that may look like in the future, consider their view on trans-gender or transsexuality:

…at the present time, the Universal House of Justice considers the change of sex to be a medical question on which the advice of medical experts should be sought….

It has decided that changes of sex or attempts to change sex should, at the present time, be considered medical questions on which advice and guidance should be sought from experts in that field.
Research Department letter to individual Baha’i (26 December 2002)

It is only natural that the same respect that is given to medical professionals in the above response would be extended to them for the question of other issues, including homosexuality. According to these experts, gender reassignment has a proven track record of successfully helping patients change their gender and become happier, healthier individuals. The field of sexual orientation change on the other hand is littered with pseudo-science and harmful procedures that damage patients health.

There is also this letter which reminds us lovingly to ‘mind our own bees-wax’:

Regarding the matter of the young men you have raised in your letter: he feels that they should be treated like any other people seeking admittance to the Faith, and be accepted on the same basis. Our teachings, as outlined in the Advent of Divine Justice, on the subject of living a chaste life, should be emphasized to them just as every other applicant, but certainly no ruling whatsoever should be laid down in this matter. The Baha’is have certainly not yet reached that stage of moral perfection where they are in a position to too harshly scrutinize the private lives of other souls, and each individual should be accepted on the basis of his faith, and sincere willingness to try to live up to the Divine Standards; further than this we cannot go at present….
Letter written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi to an individual Baha’i (November 4, 1948)

Homosexual Homophobes
The ugly side of this issue is homophobia. Unfortunately the Baha’i community is not immune. Recently the NSA of Uganda joined the “Interfaith Rainbow Coalition Against Homosexuality”. To their credit the Universal House of Justice has made it clear that such a stance is unacceptable for Baha’is. For more, see Sonja’s previous article.

Homosexuality has been observed in hundreds of species. Homophobia has been observed in only one.

Several studies have shown that there is a connection between homophobia and latent homosexual tendencies:

Only the homophobic men showed an increase in penile erection to male homosexual stimuli. The groups did not differ in aggression. Homophobia is apparently associated with homosexual arousal that the homophobic individual is either unaware of or denies.
Is homophobia associated with homosexual arousal?
Adams HE, Wright LW Jr, Lohr BA.

A more recent study used a different methodology to arrive at the same conclusion: “we identified a subgroup of participants who, despite self-identifying as highly straight, indicated some level of same-sex attraction”. For more, see this New York Times article.

These studies shed light on a peculiar pattern that has emerged in modern history where prominent politicians who espouse anti-gay views are eventually exposed for being homosexual themselves. The most famous you’ll probably recall are Ted Haggard and Larry Craig. But the list is actually quite long. Thankfully there is a website dedicated to archiving these individuals: Gay Homophobe.

We humans are very good at ‘othering’. In more barbaric times isolating one group from another by highlighting superficial differences served the much needed purpose of increasing cohesion and cooperation within the group. But as our civilization advances we are shifting from this model to one based on inclusion and unity.

The colorful stories shared at the beginning show that the modern distinction between homosexual and heterosexual is both an arbitrary and recent phenomena. The terms themselves were coined in 1868 by Karl Maria-Kertbeny in German (homosexualität) and entered English two decades later. He also suggested ‘monosexual’ for masturbators and ‘pygists’ for practitioners of anal sex. Those didn’t catch on as well.

Maria-Kertbeny’s intention as a human rights campaigner were to replace the pejorative labels of ‘sodomite’ and ‘pederast’ which were common in the 19th century. While the term ‘homosexuality’ is less insulting and more descriptive, it created a false path which we have trodden until now.

Ever since the concept was given a label, homosexuality has been seen and described as a ‘deviation’ from ‘normal’ sexuality; otherwise known as heterosexuality. This is odd because there is no ‘normal’ when it comes to human sexuality. And while usually scientists are careful to define ‘normal’ before moving on to deviations, the majority skipped this part when dealing with human sexuality. Thankfully Dr. Hooker’s work remedied this oversight. Like gender, human sexuality is much more nuanced. For more, see the illuminating book: “Straight: The Surprisingly Short History of Heterosexuality”.

Conclusion
There are two separate but important issues which present an insurmountable challenge to the current widely held Baha’i views on homosexuality: the classification of homosexuality as a ‘disease’ and the assertion of the plasticity of sexual orientation. Both of these remain empty assertions, unproven and devoid of supporting evidence.

There is no discernible evidence of pathology for homosexuality, no matter how hard scientists have looked. Individuals who are homosexual live normal lives, just as the rest of humanity and they have even included astonishingly gifted, intelligent, exemplary specimens of humanity: Alan Turing, Jane Addams, Oscar Wilde, etc.

If there is no pathology on an individual level, but what about on a group or societal level? Research shows that same sex families raise healthy, well-adjusted children and that they have the same issues and challenges that ‘normal’ families do.

The only way we can pretend that homosexuality is a disease is by ignoring a mountain of evidence and insist on using outdated ideas (like Turkey’s use of the 1968 DSM). Ask yourself, would you be comfortable with having you or your loved ones given healthcare on a level that was available 60 years ago and forgo any scientific advancements since then? or would you want the most advanced treatments based on the most up to date scientific knowledge?

Related posts:

1. Homosexuality: Blueprint or Recipe?
2. The Challenge of Homosexuality
3. The Challenge of Homosexuality – Part Deux

I know of no National Spiritual Assembly which shares this information in their annual reports. An alternative source is the government census data, as Steve pointed out in the comments section of that previous article.

In the US unfortunately we do not have access to census data because Public Law 94-521 prevents the US Census Bureau from collecting such information. So we must rely on third party or academic sources.

One such source is the Religious Congregations & Membership Study. The 2010 results of this study are shown below:

From it we can learn a few interesting facts: Most Baha’i communities are located in large cities or metropolitan areas. There is an almost complete penetration of US geographically with very few counties without a Baha’i presence. The West and East coast has high concentrations of Baha’is with central US states having less concentration. And for the most part there has been no major decadal change in Baha’i US population, with new declarants balancing losses.

South Carolina along with Arizona and New Mexico seem to be ‘hotspots’. Another source confirms South Carolina as the state with the highest per capita Baha’i population:

From the Association of Religious Data Archives

The data is a bit dated being from 2000 but it shows 17,586 Baha’is in South Carolina representing 0.438% of the state’s population. New Mexico is second with 2,665 and representing a relative 0.147% of that state’s population.

If you know of a more accurate source, please let us know in the comments below.

Related posts:

1. United States NSA Election – 2011
2. National Spiritual Assembly (United States) Letter – April 8, 2007
3. Iranians Curious About “Bahai”, Americans Not

In the US, the delegates at the 14th Baha’i National Convention elected the following members (in descending order of votes):

Kenneth E. Bowers
Jacqueline Left Hand Bull
David F. Young
Muin Afnani
Juana C. Conrad
S. Valerie Dana
Fariba Aghdasi
Erica Toussaint-Brock
Robert C. Henderson

These were the same 9 individuals who were on the NSA previously. To illustrate just how much incumbency controls these elections, the first 5 members received the same order of magnitude of votes as last year (Kenneth E. Bowers the most, Jacqueline Left Hand Bull next, and so forth).

In Canada, the “new” National Spiritual Assembly is:

Mehran Anvari (Vice-Chairperson)
Deloria Bighorn (Chairperson)
Judy Filson
Lisa Flynn
Karen McKye (Secretary)
Gordon Naylor
Enayat Rawhani (Treasurer)
Susanne Tamas
Elizabeth Wright

These individuals have been elected to the NSA for many years. Judy Filson and Enayat Rohani have been serving for more than 17 years consecutively. For the NSA as a whole, the average consecutive membership is between 9-10 years. This means that on average each person has been an NSA member for about 10 years continuously.

Lisa Flynn, the youngest and newest member of the NSA replaces Simon Grandy who was in turn also the youngest and newest member at the time of his election in 2010. Flynn was previously on the appointed arm of the administration serving as an assistant ABM.

One interesting note is from the official US Baha’i Unit Convention site which tells us that less than 25% of eligible voters participate in these important elections:

This low participation rate certainly exacerbates the existing incumbency bias and further reinforces it. As the same nine people are elected again and again, individual Baha’is feel an increasing sense of apathy which keeps the participation rate low.

For a more in-depth discussion of the current challenges of Baha’i elections, see last year’s article about the Canadian NSA and the US NSA elections.

Related posts:

1. National Spiritual Assembly (United States) Letter – April 8, 2007
2. US Annual Report from National Spiritual Assembly of US
3. NSA of Canada: Two New By-election Members

According to the House of Justice, the construction of the Temple in Chile and these new houses of worship mark the “Fifth Epoch of the Formative Age of the Faith”.

As well, several local Houses of Worship will be built in select localities. These should be familiar to Baha’is if they have been keeping up with the news of international teaching successes. A document from 2008, “Attaining the dynamics growth: Glimpses from five continents” prepared by the International Teaching Center outlined several of these localities.

Among them: Bihar Sharif in India which is a predominantly rural area with 1200 villages each with 1000 average population. Matunda Soy and Tiriki West clusters in Kenya were noted for their achievements in the 2008 Regional conference as part of the international Five Year conferences. A personal Baha’i blog from Tiriki West cluster offers a bit more detail. Another locality with this distinction is Norte del Cauca in Colombia which is the site of the original Ruhi courses.

Battambang in Cambodia was the site of a regional conference in 2009 with Baha’is participating from Laos, Thailand, Vietnam and Cambodia. Finally Tanna in the Pacific island of Vanuatu will also be a site for a local house of worship.

The Ridvan message is below:

Related posts:

1. Universal House of Justice: Ridvan Message 2008
2. Universal House of Justice: Ridvan Message 2009
3. Universal House of Justice: Ridvan Message 2011

For a very long time the official estimate of the size of the Baha’i worldwide community has been 5-6 million. This is the figure often cited in media, as was the case in the recent CBS religion special: “What They Believe: Hindus, Zoroastrians, Baha’is”.

Reputable sources more recently have cited anywhere between 7.9 and 5.5 million. Unfortunately, official figures are not released by the Baha’i World Center. The various national statistics are aggregated but for reasons unexplained these figures are not shared publicly.

Estimating the size of any religious organization accurately is challenging. The Baha’i Faith is by comparison easier to measure because of the requirement to officially declare membership. As well, Baha’i administrations within every community keep accurate voting records which can be used to approximate community membership very closely.

Perhaps more importantly, the growth rate of the Baha’i Faith is also murky. Several decade old sources put the growth rate at the top of fastest growing religions. However, more recent data seems to show a stagnation or at least a slow down in the growth rate. As well, had this growth rate continued, the 20 year old statistic of “5-6 million” would now be 8 million instead.

The explosive growth that occurred between 1950-1980 seems to have slowed down significantly. The recent attempts at expansion through Ruhi related strategies do not seem to be bearing fruit. One explanation may be that while Ruhi fits with Columbian culture, it does not with North American or Western European cultures. For more see, “Time for Ruhi to Show Us the Money”

The simplest way to measure a community’s growth is to look at a few statistics that are kept by all Local Spiritual Assemblies. Below is the table for these statistics from the largest Baha’i community in Canada:

It must be noted that this city not only is home to the largest Baha’i community, it is also a very dynamic and active one with multiple teaching events and campaigns throughout the year, otherwise known as ‘cycles of growth’. The explanation of the growth in the adult population from 1527 in 2010 to 1663 in 2012 is inter-city migration.

As with the average Baha’i community, a significant portion of this Baha’i community’s resources are marshaled towards teaching efforts. Traditionally that fell on the shoulders of the local teaching committee which planned and coordinated various events and programs. But with the advent of new ideas originating from FUNDAEC that role has been supplemented with a whole host of other activities: study circles, Ruhi courses, door-to-door direct teaching, and cycles of growth, IPG, CGC, and an alphabet soup of other acronyms.

What has this frenzy of activity accomplished? Not much.

In the past two years the growth has been anemic and this year, nonexistent. In fact, the growth rate may very well be overestimated by these figures because generally, when people choose to withdraw from a religion they rarely submit a formal resignation. More often they simply withdraw from activities and stop participating within the community. It is impossible to measure the true number of persons who have decided to leave the community for this reason. The most helpful measure to remedy this is to look at active members of the community. But this would severely restrict the number further because active participation in feasts, voting in elections, donations to funds, etc. are between 25-30% on average for communities.

The alarming thing is that the juxtaposition of this frenzy of activity and “busyness” with the lack of results is not mentioned nor discussed within the community. The annual report of the LSA certainly does not make mention of it.

Personally, I do not believe that quantitative growth is as important as improvements in the quality of community life. These are more challenging to measure by their very nature, however they are prerequisites for quantitative growth.

But as long as we are embarking on a massive mobilization of resources to produce a result, don’t you think it might be a good idea to consult about why the result isn’t being achieved?

One of the buzzwords thrown around is “systematization”. What could be more systematic than measuring the effectiveness of your actions and correcting course as deemed necessary?

While one of the fundamental pillars of Baha’i life is consultation. Sadly, when it comes to addressing the ‘elephant in the room’, few Baha’is are informed about the results of their community’s teaching efforts and fewer still are ready to bring it up as a topic of discussion.

If you are interested in discussing this within your community, talk to your local LSA and get some feedback from them on the number of enrollments, resignations, deaths and map out the trend for your locality for the past few years. With this information you can then embark on a more fruitful consultation about the activities within your community that have or have not provided the results that you want.

Related posts:

1. Second Fastest Growing Religion
2. Financial Scandal Rocks Italian Baha’i Community

As the title suggests, the program introduces these three lesser known religious traditions of Hindus, Zoroastrians and Baha’is among an American audience. For Baha’is, the program is well timed as it coincides with the centenary celebrations of Abdu’l-Baha’s trip to the US and will dovetail with these efforts to raise general awareness of the Baha’i Faith there.

Hindus:
Anand Venkatkrishnan, a second-generation immigrant from India talks about the importance of action and how faith is more about what you do than what you believe. The program also visits Sri Maha Vallabha Ganapati Devasthanam (Hindu Temple) where Mysorekar a abhisheka ceremony is performed.

Zoroastrians:
We meet Roshan and Rohinton Rivetna who moved to the US to find themselves isolated from their faith community. Slowly they established a new 700 member community and their son, a second-generation American Zoroastrian serves his faith as an architect designing temples combining tradition and modern designs. Since Zoroastrians must marry other Zoroastrians, the small size of the worldwide community (only 125,000) presents a challenge.

Baha’is:
The Wilmette Temple features prominently as a Baha’i landmark and symbol. Several Baha’is including S. Valerie Dana, a member of the National Spiritual Assembly of the Baha’is of the United States (and an officer, Deputy Secretary) are interviewed.

After a brief introduction of the Baha’i Faith, Scott Conrad, the Project Manager of the Baha’i Temple’s new Welcome Center, and architect for the US Baha’i National Center shares the history of the mother temple of the West. Two members of the Baha’i National Communications Office, Glen Fullmer & Ellen Price, also participated in the production.

No related posts.

Not surprisingly, the largest celebrations are happening in the US. Below is a list of some of these:

The US Baha’i community has created a beautiful new website to aggregate and organize information on these events: Abdu’l-Baha in America 1912-2012

From there you can follow the city by city travels of the Master, read press clippings and see photos of the people and places. Here’s a gallery of photos of Abdu’l-Baha. They also have a list of events commemorating the centenary in major cities (Chicago, Washington, New York, San Francisco and Philadelphia).

There are also several multi-media and social media initiatives. One of the most intriguing is called “239 Days in America” which will chronicle Abdu’l-Baha’s itinerary on an hour by hour basis through twitter (@239Days) and using facebook‘s new timeline feature. Their website will also feature more in depth feature article.

239 Days in Ameica is the collaborative effort of Rob Sockett, Jonathan Menon and Caitlin Shayda Jones. Follow the Master along 100 years in the past using either twitter, facebook or their own website.

Kathleen Holmlund has created another website to document Abdu’l-Baha’s travel to the West. It too will feature daily reports of the activities of the Master and His travels. You can view the entries based on the country: US, UK, France, and other countries.

“The Journey West” is another group initiative with the same purpose as the other projects mentioned already. As well as stories and pictures of Abdu’l-Baha’s visit to the West, it also features a podcast reading of the many talks Abdu’l-Baha gave in churches, halls and people’s homes.

The blog “Abdu’l-Baha’s Journey in America” may be stylistically simpler and more humble than the previous online projects but it makes up for that by the sheer volume and quality of its content. Anne Perry has been writing consistently since April 2011 and has done a fantastic job describing the visit on a daily basis as well as showcasing the many individuals that Abdu’l-Baha came in contact with.

To complement the online travel journal, along with her husband Tim Perry and Bahram Jalalizadeh, Anne has also been working on a film documentary titled Luminous Journey. It has yet to be released but you can watch a short trailer at the previous link.

Another great resource to learn more about Abdu’l-Baha’s visit to the West (it involved much more than just the US!) is from wikipedia. Rainn Wilson has also published an interesting article: The Titanic’s Forgotten Survivor.

Finally, to finish off the list, I wanted to share with you an article written by Sen McGlinn which addresses the often misunderstood and therefore controversial quote of Abdu’l-Baha from one of His talks in America: Abdu’l-Baha and the African tribe.

And don’t forget, Kalimat Press is celebrating the event by providing their customers with a special gift on Baha’i books.

Related posts:

1. 100 Year Anniversary Abdu’l-Baha’s US Visit – Special from Kalimat Press

The Islamic regime in Iran may shock everyone and ameliorate its stance on its ‘right to nuclear energy’. But even if it does, it will be for only one reason: self-preservation. For that same reason Iran is not letting up any pressure on human rights or freedoms of expression within its borders.

The recent UN special rapporteur’s report outlines just how bad the situation is in Iran and how it is worsening every year; not just for Baha’is but for anyone who falls foul of the Islamic regime.

In a few months access to the internet will be severely curtailed as Iran rolls out a “clean internet” which will be devoid of gmail, google, hotmail, twitter, etc. to be replaced with Iran Mail and “Iran Search Engine”. Iranians must register with their full legal name, address and national ID in order to use it. The next step will be a fully self-contained national intranet scheduled to go live in August 2012.

As human rights abuses perpetrated on the Iranian Baha’is continue, the 7 members of the Yaran (the alternative to an NSA which operated as the administrative body for the Baha’is of Iran) have been incarcerated for 10,000 days. The news of their arrest was broken first on Baha’i Rants in 2008: Baha’i Administrative Body of Iran Arrested.

This tragic milestone has lead to a redoubled effort by Baha’is to advocate on their behalf. A recent Op-Ed by Dr. Kishan Manoucha on the Wall Street Journal is one example of this.

Another is the Sentinel Project, a non-profit NGO based in Canada with the aim of providing an early warning system to prevent genocide around the world. Right now there are two situations of concern that they are monitoring, the Baha’is of Iran and Kenya.

The Sentinel Project monitors several important variables such as “symbolization”, “dehumanization”, “preparation” and “polarization”. They base these reports on available information, including the work of Sen McGlinn in reporting and translating Iranian reports.

The Sentinel Project has released several reports about its work on behalf of the Baha’is of Iran, including “Threat of Genocide to the Bahá’ís of Iran” and a Supplementary Report.

The reports by the Sentinel Project mention several important variables including the Hojjatieh Society which I wrote about in 2005.

While the efforts of NGOs like the Sentinel Project are laudable and all decent persons everywhere wish to see a free and democratic Iran which upholds human rights, the Baha’is that are able to leave Iran and remove themselves from harm should continue to do so (Farewell to Iran). It is my sincere wish that the UHJ acts as it did in the previous intensification of persecution of Baha’is in Iran and actively encourage and support the emigration of Baha’is from Iran for their safety.

Related posts:

1. Farewell To Iran
2. Baha’i Administrative Body of Iran Arrested
3. UHJ Letter to Baha’is of Iran Naw-Ruz 168 BE

To those unfamiliar with the history, Hossain Danesh was a psychiatrist practicing in Canada as well as a long time member of the National Spiritual Assembly of the Baha’is of Canada from the 1980′s to early 1990′s. He was Secretary General of the NSA for many of those years.

Multiple patients brought charges of sexual misconduct against Hossain Banadaki Danesh. The result of the investigation and procedure was that in 1994 the Ontario College of Physicians and Surgeons along with Hossain Danesh and the victims came to an out of court agreement. This agreement resulted in Danesh being stripped of his membership in that organization as well as losing his legal rights to practice as a psychiatrist and the forfeiting of any future application for re-entry into same. As well, Danesh agreed to pay $10,000 towards the costs of therapy for the three former patients. Danesh did not admit to any of the charges as part of the out of court settlement, which is normal for these sorts of things.

Throughout the process Danesh was allowed to maintain his membership in the NSA and he only resigned his membership because he had been gifted a new cushy job as head of the newly established Baha’i university, Landegg Academy, in Switzerland. Danesh was shipped off across the ocean, away from the scandal and safely nestled into this new job. Unfortunately the gig didn’t last long as Danesh’s management and leadership sank Landegg into a sea of debt.

Now that Hossein Danesh is back in Canada, the ‘old boy’ network, of which he was a ranking member, has continued to promote him in the very field in which he disgraced himself. In the past few years he has been repeatedly promoted by the institutions for seminars such as “Healthy Marriage and Family Life” and “Shaping our Destiny: An Open Forum for Youth and Young Adults”. The latest will be April 15th at the Toronto Baha’i Center:

Reflections on the Baha’i Concept of Suffering

The talk will address suffering as often encountered in marriages and families these days and is suitable for both Baha’is and any interested friends. There will be time for questions and answers that permit exploring the many dimensions and experiences that frequently come up in relation to this topic. We are looking into making arrangements for simultaneous translation into Persian.

For those who may not know him, Dr. Danesh is an author, international lecturer and consultant, with more than thirty five years of academic and clinical experience as a psychiatrist and peace educator.

If someone is going to give a seminar on weight loss, you would balk if they waddled onto the stage, wheezing from the exertion of having to cart their massively obese form around. It is as ludicrous to have a man who was disgraced and thrown out of his profession for sexual misconduct to give a seminar on relationships.

Why is Danesh given the star treatment? why are seminars arranged for him? why are these community events promoted heavily by the NSA in Baha’i communities through official Baha’i channels? why is the truth about his past hidden? why is he referred to as a “psychiatrist” when he does not have the legal right to use that title?

To be clear this issue is not a personal one with Hossain Danesh. Rather it is about the nature of the community that we wish to develop and the values which we want to uphold and present to the world at large. It is wrong for the NSA of Canada to promote Danesh to a position of trust within the community for topics like family, relationships, and marriage simply because he was the quintessential insider. By doing so they are communicating that they are more aligned with personal ‘network’ connections and less so with the animating spirit and values of the Baha’i Faith. They are demonstrating that they value “Danesh’s” prestige more than they value the community itself.

Related posts:

1. Hossain Danesh Heavily Promoted By NSA