HELP!!!!
Nico
recently, I signed the card and everything, and in the spirit of
independent investigation of truth, I have been researching everything
I can about the Faith- from Baha'i and non-Baha'i sources. Some
people's horror stories about their experiences scare me to death! I
have already been scarred by 3 years as a Jehovah's Witnesses..trust
me, this is no better. Once one is baptized as a Jehovah's Witness
(which thankfully I was not), it is nearly impossible to leave. Is it
any easier to leave the Baha'i Faith? I am so scared..I feel like I
have resigned my entire life to something that will eventually
suffocate me, like it has done for so many others..any advice?
Anything would be appreciated- and no more pleas to return to the
Faith- I am sick and tired already.
Brian Walker
Nico - why scared? Let's take you through things ...
1. If you believe in Baha'u'llah, you are a Baha'i.
2. If you declare yourself to be a member of the Baha'i community (as
you have) you are also free to leave.
3. You can leave formally (resign)
4. Or you can leave informally (become inactive)
5. If you do leave, you can associate with your Baha'i friends if you want
6. Those of your friends who care about you may plead with you to come
back, but if they were true friends they would want you to make the
right decision, wouldn't they? (And if they did not care enough to plead
with you, would they be caring friends?)
Advice? Yes - be confident in yourself, take charge of your life, read
as much as you can, and practise what you preach.
And clean your teeth before you go to bed.
All the best,
Brian
Cal E. Rollins
Catholic Church and his Catholic family. He converted them, however, to
Jehovah's Witness and his mother even convinced folk that she was one of
the 144,000. After that, twenty years ago, he became a Baha'i which sent
his JW family that he'd religiously converted into a real fit. They
finally gave up asking him when he was Coming Back To the Truth and
sending him Watch Tower from the Farm in N.Y. He often gets bouts of
guilt and JW flashbacks after all this time but feels relieved to know
some of the realities about JWs just as he did about Catholics and
Baha'is. We're humans and "children of the half-light" as the Guardian
allegedly called us. One foot in the light and one in the dark with a
banana peel under the one in the light I like to say.
So cheer up, and welcome to the Scared Club. --Cal
Karen Bacquet
--
"The essence of all that We have revealed for thee is Justice . . ." --
Baha'u'llah
Nico <weirdpl...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:a0c4fa77.02110...@posting.google.com...
> I know I'm only 19 years old, but I have joined the Baha'i Faith
> recently, I signed the card and everything, and in the spirit of
> independent investigation of truth, I have been researching everything
> I can about the Faith- from Baha'i and non-Baha'i sources.
Dear Nico,
Even though I have been strongly critical of some aspects of Baha'i policy,
one's experience very much depends on one's local community. Some are
controlling; some are mellow. Some are well-organized; some can't get their
act together. If you believe in Baha'u'llah, you are a Baha'i -- whether
you are on the rolls or not. While you should be aware that there are some
in the administration out there who aren't too much different that the JWs
you describe, most are not. So, calm down, and just keep your eyes open.
And nothing has been done to anyone for leaving the Baha'i Faith. At most,
if they think you are leaving to escape sanctions, they might want to talk
to you -- but there's no way to force you to talk to them, if you don't want
to. In fact, the Baha'i administration would rather someone leave than
publicly disagree with the UHJ, and a few outspoken people have been taken
from the rolls for this. And nothing is ever done to anyone for not
participating in Baha'i activities while remaining on the rolls -- which is
an option if your local community becomes "suffocating".
And, keep on researching. It isn't clear from your post, but have you
resigned your membership, or are you just thinking about it?
Love, Karen
http://www.bacquet.tk
Karen Bacquet
--
"The essence of all that We have revealed for thee is Justice . . ." --
Baha'u'llah
Nico <weirdpl...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:a0c4fa77.02110...@posting.google.com...
> I know I'm only 19 years old, but I have joined the Baha'i Faith
> recently, I signed the card and everything, and in the spirit of
> independent investigation of truth, I have been researching everything
> I can about the Faith- from Baha'i and non-Baha'i sources.
Dear Nico,
Even though I have been strongly critical of some aspects of Baha'i policy,
one's experience very much depends on one's local community. Some are
controlling; some are mellow. Some are well-organized; some can't get their
act together. If you believe in Baha'u'llah, you are a Baha'i -- whether
you are on the rolls or not. While you should be aware that there are some
in the administration out there who aren't too much different that the JWs
you describe, most are not. So, calm down, and just keep your eyes open.
And nothing has been done to anyone for leaving the Baha'i Faith. At most,
if they think you are leaving to escape sanctions, they might want to talk
to you -- but there's no way to force you to talk to them, if you don't want
to. In fact, the Baha'i administration would rather someone leave than
publicly disagree with the UHJ, and a few outspoken people have been taken
from the rolls for this. And nothing is ever done to anyone for not
participating in Baha'i activities while remaining on the rolls -- which is
an option if your local community becomes "suffocating".
And, keep on researching. It isn't clear from your post, but have you
resigned your membership, or are you just thinking about it?
Also, I run a support group for disillusioned Baha'is, if you are
interesting. No pressure is ever put on anyone to go one direction or
another; we're just there to help.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/unenrolledbahai
Love, Karen
http://www.bacquet.tk
Nico
but I plan on doing so right away. The situation is this: a friend of
mine, about my age, introduced me to the Baha'i Faith about 3 years
ago. I had recently left the Jehovah's Witnesses (who incidentally
have still not quit harassing my family), and was very wary of the
Baha'i Faith, but I still wanted to learn more about it, so I did. I
was blown away by his (friend's) amazing ability to debate Baha'i
theological concepts for hours on end- no matter what I threw at him,
he seemed to have an answer for everything. This made a major
impression on me after several years of the Jehovah's Witnesses and
their notable lack of answers to any question I asked. Anyway, I
digress :-p. My Baha'i friend was very patient with me and loaned me
several Baha'i books to help me in my quest for truth.
After reading these books my decision was made- I was going to become
a Baha'i, irrespective of the fact that my parents threatened to kick
me out of the house if I did so. So I signed the card and became a
Baha'i. For some time afterwards I felt that euphoric feeling that
people tend to get when they convert to a new faith- I finally had a
true spiritual framework around which to frame my life. Afterwards, I
noticed my social calendar filling up as well (a big deal for me; I
don't exactly fit into the popular crowd *l*), so for the next 2 and a
half years or so, I didn't even dream of leaving.
But then I began to notice something: I could never get a straight
answer out of anyone when I tried to debate with them (an example, one
of many more: I was debating with my Baha'i friend not too long ago
about the book Thief in the Night by William Sears...my friend's point
of view was that it was a great example of how to introduce the Faith
to Christians...my position was that Sears needed to get his
historical facts and Biblical numbers straight before misleading
people the way he did..however unintentionally. Friend then said,
"Well, Nicole, you haven't read the book obviously!", to which I said
"I read it twice. Have you even read the Bible?" his response "No, I
don't feel I need to."-which is silly, since the book is based on
Bible prophecy and the Baha'i Faith). Anyway, what I'm getting at
here is that I was noticing that when my position was in conflict with
the Baha'i position, they would always try and change the subject- and
seldom research non-Baha'i sources in their efforts.
This put me off. So I did some research of my own and decided that I
could no longer be a part of the Faith. But I am still scared. Like
I said, I feel like i have resigned myself to something that might be
harder to leave than it appears, like the JWs were. After all, it's
not simply a matter of not going to Feasts anymore.
Dermod Ryder
Hi Nico,
Do not fear leaving the BF. I did it twenty years ago and although
they dread and loathe me, they can do nothing about me - locally I
used to be the biggest pain in the ass they had but I've got
competition now and just will have to try harder.
All you have to do is write a letter to the NSA telling it you are
leaving; you are enclosing your card; you wish to have no contact of
any kind whatsoever with them from here on. That should do the trick.
If it doesn't, feel free to e-mail me privately and I'll do whatever I
can to ensure you are not troubled by them in any way.
Dermod.
Karen Bacquet
--
"The essence of all that We have revealed for thee is Justice . . ." --
Baha'u'llah
Nico <weirdpl...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:a0c4fa77.02110...@posting.google.com...
> -Sorry, I should have clarified; I haven't resigned my membership yet,
> but I plan on doing so right away. The situation is this: a friend of
> mine, about my age, introduced me to the Baha'i Faith about 3 years
> ago. I had recently left the Jehovah's Witnesses (who incidentally
> have still not quit harassing my family),
Dear Nicole,
The Baha'is would not go anywhere near your family unless they were Baha'is.
>
> But then I began to notice something: I could never get a straight
> answer out of anyone when I tried to debate with them (an example, one
> of many more: I was debating with my Baha'i friend not too long ago
> about the book Thief in the Night by William Sears...my friend's point
> of view was that it was a great example of how to introduce the Faith
> to Christians...my position was that Sears needed to get his
> historical facts and Biblical numbers straight before misleading
> people the way he did..however unintentionally. Friend then said,
> "Well, Nicole, you haven't read the book obviously!", to which I said
> "I read it twice. Have you even read the Bible?" his response "No, I
> don't feel I need to."-which is silly, since the book is based on
> Bible prophecy and the Baha'i Faith). Anyway, what I'm getting at
> here is that I was noticing that when my position was in conflict with
> the Baha'i position, they would always try and change the subject- and
> seldom research non-Baha'i sources in their efforts.
One of the big shocks I had on coming into the community was that, for
people who supposedly believe in the unity of religion, there is an
astonishing ignorance and lack of interest in other religions -- other than
interpreting their prophecies to fit the advent of Baha'u'llah. That your
friend has no interest in reading the Bible does not surprise me at all.
>
> This put me off. So I did some research of my own and decided that I
> could no longer be a part of the Faith. But I am still scared. Like
> I said, I feel like i have resigned myself to something that might be
> harder to leave than it appears, like the JWs were. After all, it's
> not simply a matter of not going to Feasts anymore.
Actually, it could be that simple, depending on your situation. What I would
suggest is that you take some time, think about it. Resignations require
that you renounce your belief, in either Baha'u'llah or the administration.
People who send in resignation letters without that will get a letter back
asking for an explanation and telling you not to leave because of bad
community experiences. A couple of the people on my list got a letter like
that back. Another thing you may have to be prepared for is that your
Baha'i friends won't be much interested in keeping up a friendship with you.
That happens to a lot of people who leave -- they are far more likely to
avoid you than hassle you in any fashion. I didn't experience that because
I built real friendships over a period of years while I was enrolled, but
with you being in the community such a brief time, expect that the phone
will stop ringing.
I'm trying to get a handle on what you are afraid of, exactly. The more
specific you are, the more realistic I can be about how valid a concern it
is. The Baha'i Faith can be hard to leave for people who have Baha'i
families and were raised in the Faith, but that's more because of the social
and emotional repurcussions. It can be hard to leave for a person who
converted to the Faith when they were young, and has been in the Faith over
a period of years, because they have committed so much of their life to it.
But, unless there is something about your situation I don't know about, I
don't see why it would be "harder to leave than it appears".
And I also am not really certain how you feel about Baha'u'llah -- but if
you'd rather not talk about your personal belief on a public list like this,
I'll understand. It's just, as I said, if you believe in Baha'u'llah, then
you are a Baha'i, whether part of the community or not. And while I
understand that some Baha'is are really in quite impossible community
situations, overall I think it's better to stay in the community than leave,
if at all possible. Anyway, I would suggest that you make sure that you are
clear in your own mind what you believe (or, at least, what you don't
believe) before you resign, even if you don't want to share it with us here.
Love, Karen
http://www.bacquet.tk
OhMyGoodness
of the spirit starts to grow in the human soul. This seed must be watered
by the outpourings of the Holy Spirit. These gifts of the spirit are
received through prayer, meditation, study of the Holy Utterances and
service to the Cause of God. The fact of the matter is that service in the
Cause is like the plough which ploughs the physical soil when seeds are
sown. It is necessary that the soil be ploughed up, so that it can be
enriched, and thus cause a stronger growth of the seed. In exactly the same
way the evolution of the spirit takes place through ploughing up the soil
of the heart so that it is a constant reflection of the Holy Spirit. In
this way the human spirit grows and develops by leaps and bounds.
"Naturally there will be periods of distress and difficulty, and even
severe test.; but if that person turns firmly towards the Divine
Manifestation, studies carefully His Spiritual teachings and receives the
blessings of the Holy Spirit, he will find that in reality these tests and
difficulties have been the gifts of God to enable him to grow and develop."
(From a letter written on behalf of the Guardian to an individual believer,
October 6, 1954: Living the Life, pp. 18-19)
Susan Maneck
I'm glad you are committed to independently investigating the truth. That being
the case, please don't take these scare stories at face value. Nor should you
worry overly much about the rigidity of certain Baha'is in the community. You
will find that Baha'is run the whole gamut from oscurantism to extreme
liberalism.
>Once one is baptized as a Jehovah's Witness
>(which thankfully I was not), it is nearly impossible to leave. Is it
>any easier to leave the Baha'i Faith? I am so scared.
You are perfectly free to leave the Faith in good conscience at any time. Let
me share with you a passage letter the Universal House of Justice that was
written to me when I was experiencing similiar confusion.
" Parallel with this, the Baha'i Faith upholds the freedom of conscience which
permits a person to follow his chosen religion: no one may be compelled to
become a Baha'i, or to remain a Baha'i if he conscientiously wishes to leave
the Faith. As to the thoughts of the Baha'is themselves -- that is those who
have chosen to follow the religion of Baha'u'llah -- the institutions do not
busy themselves with what individual believers think unless those thoughts
become expressed in actions which are inimical to the basic principles and
vital interests of the Faith."
If the UK NSA appears reluctant to accept George's resignation it is because it
is not clear he made it in 'good conscience.' In other words he didn't resign
because he ceased to believe but only because he didn't want to do what the NSA
asked of him.
You wrote in regards to Bill Sears' book the following:
"> was debating with my Baha'i friend not too long ago
>about the book Thief in the Night by William Sears...my friend's point
>of view was that it was a great example of how to introduce the Faith
>to Christians...my position was that Sears needed to get his
>historical facts and Biblical numbers straight before misleading
>people the way he did..however unintentionally. "
You are quite correct about the inaccuracies of Thief in the Night. And the
Publishing Trust itself is well aware of them, but the book is so popular that
it keeps getting reprinted. But Michael Sours Rouhani wrote most of his stuff
on Christianity precisely to correct errors found in works like Thief in the
Night.
Anyway, what I'm getting at
>here is that I was noticing that when my position was in conflict with
>the Baha'i position, they would always try and change the subject- and
>seldom research non-Baha'i sources in their efforts.
I think you are making assumptions about what the Baha'i position is on the
basis of what certain Baha'is happen to believe. This is a mistake and I urge
you not to make a decision on this basis. Can I suggest you try something else
first? I run a list called Baha'i Studies. You can subscribe to it via this
website. http://list.jccc.net/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=bahai-st
Hang out there for a week and ask all the questions which are troubling you and
then decide. Whatever you do, make your decision on the basis of what you
really believe, not out of fear.
warmest, Susan
Dermod Ryder
"Susan Maneck " <sma...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021106221323...@mb-fp.aol.com...
> Dear Weird,
The name is "Nico" not "Weird" - if the former is good enough for the
poster and others it is not for you to attribute that word which best
suits you.
> I'm glad you are committed to independently investigating the truth.
That being
> the case, please don't take these scare stories at face value. Nor
should you
> worry overly much about the rigidity of certain Baha'is in the
community. You
> will find that Baha'is run the whole gamut from oscurantism to
extreme
> liberalism.
They are not scare stories - the Bahai apparat is full of tinpot
tyrants who imagine themselves to be the "Voice of God" or equivalent.
These things are well documented. At the same time it is important to
emphasise that they are tinpot tyrants - poke them once in the eye and
they go running back to Mama.
<SNIP>
> If the UK NSA appears reluctant to accept George's resignation it is
because it
> is not clear he made it in 'good conscience.' In other words he
didn't resign
> because he ceased to believe but only because he didn't want to do
what the NSA
> asked of him.
In other words the NSA decides for you whether you can leave or not.
But this power is imaginary. If you want to leave you simply tell
them you are going and bin the trash that comes from them in response.
> Anyway, what I'm getting at
> >here is that I was noticing that when my position was in conflict
with
> >the Baha'i position, they would always try and change the subject-
and
> >seldom research non-Baha'i sources in their efforts.
>
> I think you are making assumptions about what the Baha'i position is
on the
> basis of what certain Baha'is happen to believe. This is a mistake
and I urge
> you not to make a decision on this basis. Can I suggest you try
something else
> first? I run a list called Baha'i Studies. You can subscribe to it
via this
> website. http://list.jccc.net/cgi-bin/lyris.pl?enter=bahai-st
> Hang out there for a week and ask all the questions which are
troubling you and
> then decide. Whatever you do, make your decision on the basis of
what you
> really believe, not out of fear.
This is the worst possible place to go to pursue any independent study
of Bahaism. It is full of the addicted who will, as all "good"
Bahais will, fawn over you to either have you enlist or remain in
situ. Once that is achieved you will then be told to toe the party
line and be firm in "de Covenant." You would be better advised to put
your views and questions here or over at Talisman9 where you will hear
views from both Bahais and, more importantly, non-Bahais.
Bahai Studies is a place where you will only hear the official party
line. Needless to say I am not welcome there as I am sure the DST
will confirm.
Dermod.
george.fleming2
sma...@aol.com wrote on 7/11/02 3:13 am:
> If the UK NSA appears reluctant to accept George's resignation it is because
> it is not clear he made it in 'good conscience.' In other words he didn't
> resign because he ceased to believe but only because he didn't want to do what
> the NSA asked of him.
Professor Susan Maneck dreams she has a PHD in "Baha'i Spirtual Cyberspace
Physiognomy" so she can judge every Baha'i character by their posts on the
internet and every reason an NSA or the AO makes a decision. Instead she is
only a history lecturer in middle eastern studies, who lacks little
knowledge about the world of reality, but she thinks she can read everyones
brains half way round the world.
What the NSA ordered me to do was outside the jurisprudence of Baha'i laws,
and breached European Human rights laws. Dr Susan Maneck is that
indoctrinated in her own little Baha'i world she does not understand that.
GF
--
To get random signatures put text files into a folder called ³Random
Signatures² into your Preferences folder.
Freethought110
matter other than to accept
George's resignation as is (good or bad conscience notwithstanding, they
must accept, and have no choice in the matter to make any other
determinations either or). Should they try to take any punitive actions
against him at this point ex post hoc they will be open to a lawsuit by him
as well as be up for charges of religious persecution and violations of his
rights to free conscience and expression under both legislative authority as
well as International Human Rights treaties the British government is party
to. I would highly recommend George Fleming to thoroughly avail himself of
the rights guaranteed to him as a citizen and free agent in an Open Society
such as Great Britian and do not allow himself to be bullied or strong armed
by an corrupt authoritarian cult organization such as the Administrative
Faith. He may take note that there are individuals serving at the
International Bar Association in London who either know or advocate on
precisely such issues or know of organizations in the UK who do so gratis.
--
Freethought110
"Susan Maneck " <sma...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021106221323...@mb-fp.aol.com...
george.fleming2
> "Susan Maneck " <sma...@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:20021106221323...@mb-fp.aol.com...
>
>
> If the UK NSA appears reluctant to accept George's resignation it is because
> it is not clear he made it in 'good conscience.' In other words he didn't
> resign because he ceased to believe but only because he didn't want to do what
> the NSA asked of him.
The UK NSA did not ask, they instructed:
"The National Spiritual Assembly therefore instructs you, with immediate
effect, to cease and disist from participating in the SCI, TRB and ARB
e-discussion lists and in any other unmoderated discussions conducted over
email......................................
The National Spirtual Assembly trusts that you will abide by what is now
being asked of you. Should you fail to do so, the National Assembly will
have no choice but to take further action".
I resigned because what they instructed me to do, was outside the
jurisprudence of Baha'i religious Law......................GF
Tom Habibi
simplest method is just ignoring everything. You can't vote yet and as far
as I gather you have to redeclare at 21 to continue being a Bahai. Just
don't do that. I have had many friends do that (only difference is they were
born to a Bahai family like they were).
"Nico" <weirdpl...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:a0c4fa77.02110...@posting.google.com...
Karen Bacquet
--
"The essence of all that We have revealed for thee is Justice . . ." --
Baha'u'llah
Tom Habibi <tkh...@york.ac.uk> wrote in message
news:aqf4cs$2if$1...@pump1.york.ac.uk...
> If someone who's 19 doesn't want to have anything to do with the faith,
the
> simplest method is just ignoring everything. You can't vote yet and as far
> as I gather you have to redeclare at 21 to continue being a Bahai. Just
> don't do that. I have had many friends do that (only difference is they
were
> born to a Bahai family like they were).
Dear Tom,
No, you don't have to "redeclare" at 21, although that is the age at which
you can take on administrative responsibilities. Everybody used to have to
enroll at 15, but for the past 15 years or so they've enrolled Baha'i
children, who are automatically assumed to be Baha'is unless they write back
and tell the NSA otherwise. Now, if a Baha'i child *wasn't* enrolled by
their parents (I couldn't, for example, because my husband isn't a Baha'i
and was opposed to it.), then they have to enroll themselves.
So, a 19 year old that wanted off the rolls would have to write and tell
them. Nicole *can* "ignore everything" and go inactive, but she would
remain on the rolls.
Susan is correct that one should not take what individual Baha'is say as
"the Baha'i position". Baha'is differ on how they see the Bible, anyway, so
one person's word is not the final one -- not even a popular writer like
Sears.
Love, Karen
http://www.bacquet.tk
Deana Holmes
news:newscache$w6785h$32e1$1...@elise.onthenet.com.au:
> He may take note that there are individuals serving at the
> International Bar Association in London who either know or advocate on
> precisely such issues or know of organizations in the UK who do so
> gratis.
He might wish to talk to the group "Liberty", which assisted an ex-
Scientologist in a lawsuit against Scientology a couple of years back.
Deana M. Holmes
mir...@sonic.net
george.fleming2
mir...@sonic.net wrote on 8/11/02 5:46 am:
Deana,
Can you expand a little more on this. Any ides what happened?......GF
george.fleming2
karenb...@hotmail.com wrote on 6/11/02 2:20 pm:
> At most, if they think you are leaving to escape sanctions, they might want to
> talk to you -- but there's no way to force you to talk to them, if you don't
> want to.
How many leave the faith to escape santions? This is the greatest load of
twaddle Susan Maneck has tried to make up that happened to me, when she
rightly knows that the UK NSA crossed the rubicon of (Jurisprudence) between
Baha'i laws and human rights laws.
My resigning was because this is the third time I have experienced
(jurisprudence problems) in my 13 years as a Baha'i. The other two were
tests at LSA level which I was not involved in. This time I have experienced
it first hand myself coming from the NSA itself, the cataylst being a letter
(or e/mails) from two American Baha'is namely Pat Kohli and Susan Maneck to
the UK NSA complaining about my presense on three unmoderated newsgroups on
cyberspace. The Baha'i Faith has no legal control over unmoderated
newsgroups on the internet.
What are santions in the Baha'i Faith?
1) loss of voting rights
The loss of voting rights is a bit of a joke to most Baha'is as many dont
even vote anyway. An example was our last unit convention meeting to vote in
a delegate. Only 7 Baha'is turned up for the annual meeting out of 53
registered Baha'is in three LSA communities.
One example of bringing one seeker into the Faith then reporting him three
months later so he lost his voting rights is as follows.
A teacher (chairman of the LSA) in my community spent five days pouring the
most affection and love onto a seeker that he signed a declaration card
immediatly. One month later the new Baha'i was voted onto the assembly.
Three months later the same (chairman of the LSA) reported the new Baha'i to
the NSA because he was a member of a freemason choir. The new Baha'i had
informed all members (including the teacher) prior to becoming a Baha'i he
was a freemason only because he loved singing in the choir. He had not been
told that to become a Baha'i he must leave the Freemasons and the choir
brfore he joined the Faith. This was deceitfully hidden from him until four
months after he had signed a declartion card.
The new Baha'i refused to leave the freemason choir and lost his voting
rights, and had to leave the assembly. He stayed that way (loss of voting
rights) for 2 years until the freemason choir broke up and a Baha'i choir
was started. He eventually left the freemasons. and got his voting rights
back again. He was later voted back onto the LSA.
All other santions in the Baha'i faith (like paying a sum of money for
commiting adultery) have yet to be implemented into the Baha'i legal system
at least in western countries. The Baha'i Faith may have different santions
in Iran for example, which I know little about.
2) Dismissal from the faith is the final santion if it can be regarded as a
santion at all...............................GF
Susan Maneck
>He might wish to talk to the group "Liberty", which assisted an ex-
>Scientologist in a lawsuit against Scientology a couple of years back.
Dear Deana,
I don't doubt that George can get his name removed from the rolls if he raises
the legal issue, with or without legal counsel. Baha'is recognize that the laws
of the land in regards to such matters would have to take precedence even over
the statements of the Shoghi Effendi. Suing them if they place any sanctions on
George would be rather ludicrous however, because the only sanctions that would
be taken against him involve things he can't do as a non-Bahai in any case. He
would not be subjected to shunning or anything else that would effect the
community's behavior towards him Therefore, he couldn't legally argue he had
suffered any harm by such sanctions. But if it is simply a matter of getting
his name off the membership rolls, though I don't know anything about British
laws, I would presume he is probably within his rights to demand that they do
this.
As far as George's assertion that his NSA violated international laws of human
rights by instructing him not to post on email lists, that would be a baseless
charge since the NSA has no power of coercion to enforce their demand. Any
sanctions they might have applied could only involve his perogatives of
membership within the Baha'i community. They are not human rights issues in the
legal sense as those involve the actions of governments.
warmest, Susan
Susan Maneck
Associate Professor of History
Jackson State University
Freethought110
defamation under Common Law doctrines. The UK is not the US.
--
Freethought110
"Susan Maneck " <sma...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021108142016...@mb-mq.aol.com...
Deana Holmes
news:B9F1389B.E428%george....@btinternet.com:
> Can you expand a little more on this. Any ides what happened?
http://www.demon.co.uk/castle/woods.html
This page pretty much gives a rundown of what happened.
Just My Personal Opinion, and only based on my American tort education in
law school, but I think you're going to have a tough case to make, George.
But talk to experienced counsel in the UK. I know the UK has different
standards for libel.
Deana M. Holmes
mir...@sonic.net
Nico
anything, I just thought it was odd. Oh well :). Actually, I haven't
even received my little introductory package yet, although I sent that
card thing in and all. My Baha'i friend told me to wait another
couple of weeks for the package. I'll still take a look at it.
I got sucked in by the firesides, I think. Having left the Jehovah's
Witnesses, with their sterile, by-the-book meetings, I was impressed
by the relaxed and welcoming atmosphere of the firesides; but then
again, there's an obvious reason for that, which I think most of you
know anyway. I can draw a parallel to the Jehovah's Witnesses here;
when they first came to our door shortly after I turned 13, my parents
readily accepted the invitation to study with them. At first my
parents received "the truth" rather lukewarmly (if that's a word), but
me, being of an impressionable age, showed great enthusiasm. It was
only then that my parents began showing any real interest: the JWs try
and get the children first, then the parents join up for fear of
losing their children should they not do so. It might be similar with
the Baha'is; maybe they don't intimidate parents into joining for fear
of breaking up the family (or maybe they do, but I don't know of any
time when they have), but now my only reservation about leaving is
losing my Baha'i friends- in this case, the threat is an indirect one.
-Nico (weird?)
Karen Bacquet
It might be similar with
> the Baha'is; maybe they don't intimidate parents into joining for fear
> of breaking up the family (or maybe they do, but I don't know of any
> time when they have),
Dear Nico,
Gotta sign those posts if you want people to address you right. :-) And no,
Baha'is do not intimidate parents into joining the Faith, although I have
known some people to receive some major pressure to convert spouses. (I got
some, but after talking to Jim, they pretty much gave up.) On the contrary,
I've known non-Baha'i parents try to pressure Baha'i children by withholding
permission for a Baha'i marriage simply because they don't like the Faith.
Lots of Baha'i converts have stories about opposition from their families.
And some older women, in particular, have stories where they had to sneak
off to Baha'i meetings, keeping their activity secret from their husbands.
but now my only reservation about leaving is
> losing my Baha'i friends- in this case, the threat is an indirect one.
Whether or not you lose your Baha'i friends depends very much on your Baha'i
friends. As I have said, it's a fairly common experience, especially since
you've been in the Faith such a short time. (You haven't even got your
introductory packet yet?) But, who knows? I very much hope that some of
them value you as an individual, not just as a convert, and that they keep
their ties of friendship with you.
Love, Karen
http://www.bacquet.tk
> -Nico (weird?)
george.fleming2
mir...@sonic.net wrote on 9/11/02 12:36 am:
Well do you agree that an NSA has the authority to order one of its members
off certain newsgroups on the Internet, just because other Baha;is have
reported him for having heated and embarrassing words with ex Baha'is?
Do you believe the NSA has the right to judge a Baha'is behaviour on the
internet anymore than they have the right to judge his behavior whilst he is
out in his local shopping market and had heated words with some ex-baha'i
dissidents there? Does the NSA have the right to order the Baha'i not to use
the shopping market because ex Baha'i dissidents use that supermarket?
Would you not agree he has the right to be on that newsgroup the same as
other Baha'is and all other citizens of planet earth?
Would you not agree if any law has been broken between the Baha'i and the
ex-Baha'is over such a heated argument it is a legal matter for the laws of
the land first before it is ever a matter for Baha'i law.
Do you not agree the NSA should have had consultation before judgement and a
letter was sent, rather than wait until I had resigned and then wish to fly
from England to Ireland to have consultation after I had received a letter
and therefore resigned?
Finally do you agree that Dr Susan Maneck and Pat Kohli are the moderators
controllers, judge and jury of all other Baha'is who post to TRB ARB and
SCI?....................................GF
GF
Susan Maneck
>
>Just wondering how my name was changed to "weird"
Dear Nico,
You hadn't signed your post so I had only your email address, which says
"weird." But I don't think you're weird.;-}
>Having left the Jehovah's
>Witnesses, with their sterile, by-the-book meetings
Well, stay away from Ruhi then. When I first saw that material I had a
knee-jerk reaction to it because it reminded me of the format of the JW
meetings I went to a couple of times in my teens. I could see right away they
didn't value independent thought. Fortunately, there other ways to deepen in
the Baha'i Faith than Ruhi.
Susan Maneck
>standards for libel.
Certainly his NSA said nothing that was libelous. The only legal grounds I can
see for George taking anyone to court would be to get his name taken off the
roles. And I doubt he would have to take it that far. At most it might take a
letter from an attorney citing the appropriate statues.
Susan Maneck
>If he is shunned he can sue in the UK because shunning is considered
>defamation under Common Law doctrines.
Not an issue in any case.
Freethought110
--
Freethought110
"Susan Maneck " <sma...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20021109022129...@mb-mq.aol.com...
Dermod Ryder
>At most it might take a
> letter from an attorney citing the appropriate statues.
The Venus de Milo, MichaelAngelo's "David" or the Statute of Liberty?
Dermod Ryder
> >
> >If he is shunned he can sue in the UK because shunning is
considered
> >defamation under Common Law doctrines.
>
> Not an issue in any case.
And how would you know, great witless one? The standard operating
practice here is to ostracise anybody who leaves the fold, immediately
that person leaves the fold and before any consultative process takes
place. That latter bit is designed to show how much such a person
loses without being totally digested by the "community" thus making
it desirable for his confessing of the sins, donning of sack cloth and
ashes and great joyful jubilant celebrations that a sinner has seen
the light. Of course if he persists in error then it's off to the
fleshiest of perdition for him with everlasting shunning. It sure
makes for a good series of sermons from the protectors of "de faith"
as George and others can testify to.
The policy has been in effect for at least twenty years and has the
effect of turning luke warm critics into ravening enemies. Great
sport altogether!
Deana Holmes
news:B9F251E4.5E4%george....@ntlworld.com:
>
> Well do you agree that an NSA has the authority to order one of its
> members off certain newsgroups on the Internet, just because other
> Baha;is have reported him for having heated and embarrassing words
> with ex Baha'is?
Well, Susan surely believes it. Personally, I'm horrified, but not
surprised. I have a lot of experience with certain groups trying to keep
control on what is said on the Internet, along with keeping their people
away from the "apostates", "religious bigots", "suppressive persons",
"antichrists", etc. etc. etc. I was one of the people who voted for this
group back in 1998, and I did it because I believe that there should be
open forums for discussion.
>
> Do you believe the NSA has the right to judge a Baha'is behaviour on
> the internet anymore than they have the right to judge his behavior
> whilst he is out in his local shopping market and had heated words
> with some ex-baha'i dissidents there? Does the NSA have the right to
> order the Baha'i not to use the shopping market because ex Baha'i
> dissidents use that supermarket?
The shopping market isn't quite the Internet, but I do think you have
certain standards to uphold as a Baha'i. I think that you were being
obnoxious (even if your behavior did not technically rise to the level of
spamming). I do think your local and national authorities could have
handled it a lot better. (The bull in the china shop approach has never
appealed to me.)
> Would you not agree he has the right to be on that newsgroup the same
> as other Baha'is and all other citizens of planet earth?
Why, of course. Whether the AO agrees is another story altogether.
> Would you not agree if any law has been broken between the Baha'i and
> the ex-Baha'is over such a heated argument it is a legal matter for
> the laws of the land first before it is ever a matter for Baha'i law.
It would depend if there is a law broken. Here in the USA, most, if not all
of what has happened to you would be not a matter for law. Organizations
have the general ability to accept or remove members as they see fit--but
they cannot libel or slander people in the process of removing them. (There
are several court cases on the subject.) As I said, I do not know how UK
libel law works, as my general impression is that it's rather opposite to
US law.
> Do you not agree the NSA should have had consultation before judgement
> and a letter was sent, rather than wait until I had resigned and then
> wish to fly from England to Ireland to have consultation after I had
> received a letter and therefore resigned?
I am not a Baha'i, so I don't know what "consultation" is. Really.
> Finally do you agree that Dr Susan Maneck and Pat Kohli are the
> moderators controllers, judge and jury of all other Baha'is who post
> to TRB ARB and SCI?....................................GF
I also don't know if that's true, George. I do know that you set
*everyone's* teeth on edge when you went on your posting spree--Baha'is,
ex-Bahai's, non-Baha'is. It's rare when you see that kind of unanimity on a
group as fractious as this. It reminds me of a certain Rev. St*v* W*nt*r
who showed up on the now-defunct GEnie service (rather a bit like AOL in
its earliest days) and proceeded to spam away on the religion board.
*Everyone*, atheists, agnostics, fundamentalists, you name it, banded
together to protect our space from this invasion. After a weekend of
posting, the invader was repulsed, but it was his obnoxiousness that made
everyone crazy. That was 12 years ago.
There's a lesson to be learned here, George, if you're willing to learn it.
Deana M. Holmes
mir...@sonic.net
Susan Maneck
>Well, Susan surely believes it.
Dear Deana,
Well, I certainly believe that internet providers should not allow their
members to spam either newsgroups or individuals. I also believe that hate
speech is inappropriate and should not be allowed in such forums. Furthermore I
don't believe the internet should be used to harrass people as George did when
he sent all those posts to Australia attempting to paint Nima as some kind of
terrorist. And yes, I do think that when an individual purports to do all this
in the name of the Faith, the Baha'i institutions have the right to ask them to
stop.
>(even if your behavior did not technically rise to the level of
>spamming).
Perhaps you weren't here when George first started posting. It was indeed
spamming by any definition. And certainly the hundreds of identical posts which
Pat, the NSA and myself recieved constituted spamming.
george.fleming2
Professor Maneck is one total nut who is completely whacko. She seems to
enjoy getting Baha'is and non-Baha'is at each other's throat's by feeding
them information behind the scenes, then she reports both to whomever she
sees fit, to try and keep the high moral ground as a good Baha'i. Her 30
years Baha'i academic knowledge gives her a pompous platform to work from.
Most information I knew about Nima was given to me by Susan Maneck herself.
There was only one newspaper Australian newspaper involved with different
branches and only one post, and if you read below Nima is not the slightest
bit angry. So why is Susan maneck still harping on at this. She is only
trying to shit stir again.
>http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/sectionindex2/0,5746,auscontacts^^TEX
T,00.html
in article newscache$qltb5h$ksi1$1...@elise.onthenet.com.au, Freethought110 at
Freetho...@bohemian.org wrote on 9/11/02 8:59 pm:
> Btw, just an update on the press spam. George actually did a valuable
> service. About a week or two after the spam I got a phone call from a
> certain prominent widely syndicated journalist here about what all that was
> about and I gave them an earfull about the AF and directed them to links
> (Fred's website, Karen and Juan's articles, my affidavit, the two defamatory
> items by the OZ NSA, all my posts on NITV, etc). So George Fleming
> unwittingly became the catalyst of a valuable 'exposing' opportunity with a
> prominent syndicated religion column writer in this country. Now they know
> all about the what is going on in the AF and so next time the AF deigns to
> ring their platitudes with certain people in the Australian press, they'll
> be asked some tough questions, all thanks to George Fleming. As they in
> Persian, an enemy shall be the cause of good/adu sabab-e khayr shavad.
>
> Tis the season to be jolly :)
> --
> Freethought110
Finally to all on TRB who have had complaints about Susan Maneck Its no use
writing to any US Baha'i AO members as she has them all in her pockets
anyway. Write to the following. Its about time DR Susan Maneck got a bit of
her own back for all the trouble she has manipulated between Baha'i and non
Baha'i alike over the years. She is the champion backbiter, shitstirrer and
backstabber of them all on all the Baha'i lists and newsgroups. But her day
will come mark my word.......................................GF
History DJS...@netscape.net Professor Bernoral Davis
(Chair, Department of History, Jackson State University)
rma...@jsums.edu Dr Ronald Mason, Jr (President, Jackson State University)
jstev...@jsums.edu Dr Joseph Martin Stevenson (Provost, Jackson State
University)
Also write gadm...@ccaix.jsums.edu and ask them to please forward to Dean
of Liberal Arts Dr. Dollye M.E. Robinson and Assistant Dean Dr. Kermit Holly
in article 20021113013255...@mb-cu.aol.com, Susan Maneck at
sma...@aol.com wrote on 13/11/02 6:32 am:
george.fleming2
authority to post to any list or newsgroup in the name of the Baha'i faith.
Herself and Pat Kohli (like many other Baha'is) also believe they have the
high moral ground and the God given right to report Baha'i to the AO on
legal matters not relating to Baha'i laws. This is called selfrighteousness,
and is the one terrible sin which is eating away at the Baha'i faith
Most ISP's whose customers are paying to use their service are reluctant to
do anything against a short spell of spamming (three days in my case on TRB
and a few other crossposts where Fred has been posting to for three years,
also told to me by Susan Maneck) otherwise the customer will just go to
another ISP and they will lose business. When others spam on newsgroups,
readers just dont bother to read what they post. Eventually they get tired
long before the readers do and stop spamming.
Finally, my private spams to American Baha'is Susan Maneck, Pat Kohli were
copies of their own posts to TRB which were sent (once) to the US NSA to
give them a bit of their own pretensious arrogance back, so they might stew
in their own juice for a while, after having reported and backstabbed me to
the UK NSA.
GF
Deana Holmes
news:20021113013255...@mb-cu.aol.com:
> Well, I certainly believe that internet providers should not allow
> their members to spam either newsgroups or individuals. I also believe
> that hate speech is inappropriate and should not be allowed in such
> forums.
I would just like to point out that hate speech is in the eye of the
beholder. Having been slapped with the moniker "religious bigot" by the
Church of Scientology, I know whereof I speak.
Deana Holmes
mir...@sonic.net