Does anyone here from a Middle Eastern Abrahamic religion background know where it says in the Koran that it is Islamic to shoot an unarmed 16 year old girl standing in the street?
Baquia
· 6 months ago
We don't really know who shot her. All lives are precious and Neda was one of many that were killed. Many more were beaten, injured and taken prisoner. God only knows what their fate will be in the hands of the Basijis and in the bowels of prisons like Evin.
Craig Parke
· 6 months ago
I now understand that this beautiful woman Neda was 27 years old. May her refined soul rest in peace. The same for all of the other people who have lost their lives.
I think these militias must be composed of very young boys and men that are anti-women. I read one account of a boy of 15 that was armed with an automatic weapon! Maybe they are all acne clad teenage sociopaths that have issues with their mothers as a root issue? It appears she was singled out by a sniper and deliberately shot through the heart as a statement.
Since the Iranian State Theocracy Clergy System claims to speak directly for "God", it does seem a bit harsh that people have to now pay the $3,000 "bullet fee" to claim the body of a loved one that was shot down.
Again, someone here that is in a Major Middle Eastern Abrahamic Religion, is there a verse that supports this mentality some where in any of them? Is the "bullet fee" concept a Koranic principle? Does anyone here know?
Would the UHJ also charge a "bullet fee" too in the future when they rule the world in the top down Baha'i State Theocracy where everyone serves forever in their lifetime incumbent positions and no one is ever held accountable for anything by any electorate for thousands of years? Does anyone know if we have some kind of justification for a "bullet fee" too? Especially since individual personal conscience is now completely forbidden in the NEWTHINK Baha'i Faith per Douglas Martin. If they say there will be a "bullet fee" it now appears no one will be able to oppose it from their personal conscience because personal conscience is now forbidden in the Baha'i Faith. I know both Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha taught the sacredness of personal conscience in Their Writings. But that is now Oldthink. Newthink is the personal opinions of the individual members of the UHJ and the personal opinions of their close personal friends on the ITC and what they all say in speeches and over lunch. That is the new sacred scripture of the Baha'i Faith.
"We have inherited a dangerous delusion from Christianity that our individual conscience is supreme. This is not a Baha'i belief. In the end, in the context of both our role in the community and our role in the greater world, we must be prepared to sacrifice our personal convictions or opinions. The belief that individual conscience is supreme is equivalent to 'taking partners with God' which is abhorrent to the Teachings of the Faith."
- Douglas Martin Former Member of the Universal House of Justice Baha'i Faith
If they apparently say their is to be a "bullet fee", no one can oppose it.
Also, would his pronouncement against dissent in U.S. politics now also apply to dissent in Iranian politics even if dissent helped result in Baha'is not being killed on Iranian soil for the next thousand years? Does anyone know if dissent is permitted in Iran per his pronouncements or it is forbidden too?
"The passion for dissent which is such a prominent part of this culture is an icon of American mythology that must be understood in the light of the Teachings, specifically, the law of obedience to a government."
- Douglas Martin Former Member of the Universal House of Justice Baha'i Faith
Or does anyone know if the video of Neda being killed and others being killed in Iran for human rights and the right of peaceful dissent would be considered a "sideshow" or a "dog and pony show" by the official BAO? Does anyone know? Is the footage of people in the streets being killed the "theater of the absurd" he is talking about? As we all now know the individual personal opinions of the current and former members of the UHJ is now Sacred Holy Writ in the Newthink Baha'i Faith so I think this is a fair question.
"Politics, worldwide, is like a parlor game, a sideshow of sorts. We all know that it is often like a dog and pony show. Baha'is respect the democratic system because, while far from perfect, is represents the sole protection to the sense of order that the world knows at this time. However, we do not deceive ourselves that the present form of democracy evident in the world today represents, in any manner, the future model of the world body politic. Unfortunately, political action groups worldwide tend to act in a form of the 'theatre of the absurd.'"
- Douglas Martin Former Member of the Universal House of Justice Baha'i Faith
Does anyone know how we are all now to apply the Newthink Teachings as Baha'is? I am trying to get with the program. But I am having a real hard time giving up my personal individual moral conscience. Can anyone here help me by telling me how they gave up theirs? Maybe a few tips would get me with the program?
Thank you for so clearly showing that some of the basic elements of Baha'i thought rest on a foundation of classic, romanticist paradigm regression.
It seems to me that the obvious problem is that Islam, and the preceeding middle eastern civilizations and cultures that much (but not all) of this material draws from, were as historically imperialist as europeans. In hindsight, after taking over vast swaths of the earth and subjugating and enslaving many other cultures, it was convenient for Islamic-Baha'i thinkers to recline under the care of the slave classes and wax ethereal about the harmony of nature, divine civilization, and so forth.
The historical reality is that Islam become highly reactionary and rigidly orthodox, and thus became weakened and effete. It was overrun not only by european colonialists, but by Mongolian tribal horsemen! Who of course had their own religious culture of "primitive" nature worship, which european romanticism sees as being spiritually "earthy and pure".
Islam - at its highest state was urban, refined, sophisticated, cosmopolitan, but became incapable of defending itself, first against the increasing economic and military power of the early "vulgar" (spiritually inferior) european mercantile and colonial powers, then later against the full forces of modernity and democratization: printing presses, widespread numeracy/literacy, industrialization, capitalism, and the FINAL HORROR: middle class consumer culture full of people confident in such "ungodly" (democratic) ideas as Natural Law, citizen participation and the openness of the "public square" and free speech.
The Islamic "core" that Baha sought to uphold and integrate with modernity and western culture was premised, at its higher (imperial) levels, on a system of governance that was controlled by aristocratic and ecclesiastic elites. Such systems were incapable of adapting to changes in the world.
The "memes" underlying such a system simply became "maladaptive", in evolutionary terms, in the post-medieval, global culture that european colonialism initiated, and which then grew into democracy.
And of course, the reformist/modernist movements, such as Baha'i, within rigidly orthodox and "corrupt" Islamic systems were brutally marginalized and supressed. There was/is a long pattern of supressing the more dynamic elements of Islamic culture, e.g., Sufism. The very people that had the capacity to adapt to the emerging realities of modernism had been marginalized.
So, I would propose that the "romanticist" notion that a "spiritually purified" form of Islamic spirituality such as Baha'i, integrated at superficial levels (not tied into subcomponent memes) with modernism and democracy is inherently a dysfunctional foundation for a system of postmodern, or integral, religious culture.
Your appeal to nature worhip is also ultimately not a viable alternative since it has no inherent consciousness of science or evolution. Have we really forgotten that the basis for fascism was full of similar imagery?
The reason that Baha'i has flopped is that its theology has just as little coherency in the modern/postmodern world as any other premodern/medieval system of thought that is out of alignment with the major memes that are driving the evolution of culture forward.
In essence, premodern/medieval memes (including nature mysticism in its various "new age" guises) will never be able to successfully "colonize" modern/postmodern culture.
What integralists have proposed is that the subcomponent memetic building blocks (technologies) of premodern/medieval spirituality be repurposed and made consistent with evolutionary theory.
Unfortunately Baha'i theology badly flubs evolution, thus has "nowhere to go" in a postmodern/integral sense. [end]
All Comments
I think these militias must be composed of very young boys and men that are anti-women. I read one account of a boy of 15 that was armed with an automatic weapon! Maybe they are all acne clad teenage sociopaths that have issues with their mothers as a root issue? It appears she was singled out by a sniper and deliberately shot through the heart as a statement.
Since the Iranian State Theocracy Clergy System claims to speak directly for "God", it does seem a bit harsh that people have to now pay the $3,000 "bullet fee" to claim the body of a loved one that was shot down.
Again, someone here that is in a Major Middle Eastern Abrahamic Religion, is there a verse that supports this mentality some where in any of them? Is the "bullet fee" concept a Koranic principle? Does anyone here know?
Would the UHJ also charge a "bullet fee" too in the future when they rule the world in the top down Baha'i State Theocracy where everyone serves forever in their lifetime incumbent positions and no one is ever held accountable for anything by any electorate for thousands of years? Does anyone know if we have some kind of justification for a "bullet fee" too? Especially since individual personal conscience is now completely forbidden in the NEWTHINK Baha'i Faith per Douglas Martin. If they say there will be a "bullet fee" it now appears no one will be able to oppose it from their personal conscience because personal conscience is now forbidden in the Baha'i Faith. I know both
Baha'u'llah and Abdu'l-Baha taught the sacredness of personal conscience in Their Writings. But that is now Oldthink. Newthink is the personal opinions of the individual members of the UHJ and the personal opinions of their close personal friends on the ITC and what they all say in speeches and over lunch. That is the new sacred scripture of the Baha'i Faith.
"We have inherited a dangerous delusion from Christianity that our
individual conscience is supreme. This is not a Baha'i belief. In the
end, in the context of both our role in the community and our role in
the greater world, we must be prepared to sacrifice our personal
convictions or opinions. The belief that individual conscience is
supreme is equivalent to 'taking partners with God' which is abhorrent
to the Teachings of the Faith."
- Douglas Martin
Former Member of the Universal House of Justice
Baha'i Faith
If they apparently say their is to be a "bullet fee", no one can oppose it.
Also, would his pronouncement against dissent in U.S. politics now also apply to dissent in Iranian politics even if dissent helped result in Baha'is not being killed on Iranian soil for the next thousand years? Does anyone know if dissent is permitted in Iran per his pronouncements or it is forbidden too?
"The passion for dissent which is such a prominent part of this culture
is an icon of American mythology that must be understood in the light of the Teachings, specifically, the law of obedience to a government."
- Douglas Martin
Former Member of the Universal House of Justice
Baha'i Faith
Or does anyone know if the video of Neda being killed and others being killed in Iran for human rights and the right of peaceful dissent would be considered a "sideshow" or a "dog and pony show" by the official BAO? Does anyone know? Is the footage of people in the streets being killed the "theater of the absurd" he is talking about? As we all now know the individual personal opinions of the current and former members of the UHJ is now Sacred Holy Writ in the Newthink Baha'i Faith so I think this is a fair question.
"Politics, worldwide, is like a parlor game, a sideshow of sorts. We all
know that it is often like a dog and pony show. Baha'is respect the
democratic system because, while far from perfect, is represents the
sole protection to the sense of order that the world knows at this time.
However, we do not deceive ourselves that the present form of democracy evident in the world today represents, in any manner, the future model of the world body politic. Unfortunately, political action groups worldwide tend to act in a form of the 'theatre of the absurd.'"
- Douglas Martin
Former Member of the Universal House of Justice
Baha'i Faith
Does anyone know how we are all now to apply the Newthink Teachings as Baha'is? I am trying to get with the program. But I am having a real hard time giving up my personal individual moral conscience. Can anyone here help me by telling me how they gave up theirs? Maybe a few tips would get me with the program?
Sen,
Thank you for so clearly showing that some of the basic elements of Baha'i thought rest on a foundation of classic, romanticist paradigm regression.
It seems to me that the obvious problem is that Islam, and the preceeding middle eastern civilizations and cultures that much (but not all) of this material draws from, were as historically imperialist as europeans. In hindsight, after taking over vast swaths of the earth and subjugating and enslaving many other cultures, it was convenient for Islamic-Baha'i thinkers to recline under the care of the slave classes and wax ethereal about the harmony of nature, divine civilization, and so forth.
The historical reality is that Islam become highly reactionary and rigidly orthodox, and thus became weakened and effete. It was overrun not only by european colonialists, but by Mongolian tribal horsemen! Who of course had their own religious culture of "primitive" nature worship, which european romanticism sees as being spiritually "earthy and pure".
Islam - at its highest state was urban, refined, sophisticated, cosmopolitan, but became incapable of defending itself, first against the increasing economic and military power of the early "vulgar" (spiritually inferior) european mercantile and colonial powers, then later against the full forces of modernity and democratization: printing presses, widespread numeracy/literacy, industrialization, capitalism, and the FINAL HORROR: middle class consumer culture full of people confident in such "ungodly" (democratic) ideas as Natural Law, citizen participation and the openness of the "public square" and free speech.
The Islamic "core" that Baha sought to uphold and integrate with modernity and western culture was premised, at its higher (imperial) levels, on a system of governance that was controlled by aristocratic and ecclesiastic elites. Such systems were incapable of adapting to changes in the world.
The "memes" underlying such a system simply became "maladaptive", in evolutionary terms, in the post-medieval, global culture that european colonialism initiated, and which then grew into democracy.
And of course, the reformist/modernist movements, such as Baha'i, within rigidly orthodox and "corrupt" Islamic systems were brutally marginalized and supressed. There was/is a long pattern of supressing the more dynamic elements of Islamic culture, e.g., Sufism. The very people that had the capacity to adapt to the emerging realities of modernism had been marginalized.
So, I would propose that the "romanticist" notion that a "spiritually purified" form of Islamic spirituality such as Baha'i, integrated at superficial levels (not tied into subcomponent memes) with modernism and democracy is inherently a dysfunctional foundation for a system of postmodern, or integral, religious culture.
Your appeal to nature worhip is also ultimately not a viable alternative since it has no inherent consciousness of science or evolution. Have we really forgotten that the basis for fascism was full of similar imagery?
http://www.weeklystandard.com/Content/Public/Ar...
The reason that Baha'i has flopped is that its theology has just as little coherency in the modern/postmodern world as any other premodern/medieval system of thought that is out of alignment with the major memes that are driving the evolution of culture forward.
In essence, premodern/medieval memes (including nature mysticism in its various "new age" guises) will never be able to successfully "colonize" modern/postmodern culture.
What integralists have proposed is that the subcomponent memetic building blocks (technologies) of premodern/medieval spirituality be repurposed and made consistent with evolutionary theory.
Unfortunately Baha'i theology badly flubs evolution, thus has "nowhere to go" in a postmodern/integral sense.
[end]