Re: Religious Tolerance

Hi John,

I enjoyed reading your tolerant and wise words.

I certainly appreciate the fact that many Baha'is, both the tolerant
ones and the intolerant ones, for many reasons would not want to
contend their views in public.

I think this is the place for people with reasonable views to assert,
modify, revise, and discuss their views. People who want to
investigate, both the Baha'is who do so because of the Command and non-
Baha'is who do so for simple pleasure, curiousity, or to follow
promptings of their own Authorities, should be able to come here and
examine these varied and contradicting Baha'i beliefs.

Perhaps you see disagreement as contention.

How do you see the fruits of the more important, tolerant and
reasonable world opinion reaching the less important, intolerant and
irrational Baha'i opinion without disagreement?

It seems to me Baha'is need to investigate more thoroughly before
accepting such opinions as those commonly expressed Baha'i opinions
the we see here (like God punishing those who don't recognize
Baha'u'llah, and universal prohibition of alcohol).

How can that be accomplished, in your mind?

--Kent



On Oct 27, 4:07 pm, John Ludgate <johnludg...@xxxxxx> wrote:
Hello Kent,

I am sure that that there are many others lurking on this list who have

very tender hearts and keen minds and loving ways and just do not want

to get into any arguments. For myself, I am happy to discuss any ideas

with anyone but do not care to be mired in arguments too but to
maintain respectful ways. I try to keep in mind the "clear tokens" that

I have received from "the Dawning-Place of the clear tokens" and remain

thankful for being guided to the "Dayspring of the signs" of God.

The "Manifestation of the Excellent Names" tells us in the Kitab-i-Iqan

that "Knowledge is of two kinds: Divine and Satanic. The one welleth
out from the fountain of divine inspiration; the other is but a
reflection of vain and obscure thoughts. The source of the former is
God Himself; the motive-force of the latter the whisperings of selfish

desire. The one is guided by the principle: "Fear ye God; God will
teach you;" the other is but a confirmation of the truth: "Knowledge is

the most grievous veil between man and his Creator." The former
bringeth forth the fruit of patience, of longing desire, of true
understanding, and love; whilst the latter can yield naught but
arrogance, vainglory and conceit."

So Bahaullah has given us a litmus test for knowledge. Judge it by it's

fruits. The Bahai faith is about love and peace and unity. May we each

find it in our lives.

with loving kindness,

john

John Ludgate
ph: 684-699-2097, fax: 699-2047, cell: 733-3566
On Oct 23, 2008, at 2:45 PM, compx2 wrote:













Thank you, John, for your wise and tolerant words.  I can only hope
there are other wise and tolerant Baha'is lurking, or perhaps some
future Baha'i or future tolerant person will see your comment: "If you
think you possess a truth that someone else does not know, then tell
them. If they accept what you say then good, if not then leave them to
themselves."

The truth I possess is that it is a good thing that Baha'is don't
agree.  I am happy for all of you that you have a different truth fro
m
mine.  I believe it will independently lead you to greater truth, if
you are indeed independently seeking truth.  Your starting point is s
o
different from mine that we can hardly expect to agree on anything,
and that can lead to great, varied diverse and wonderful truths, if we
only keep investigating.

However, my truth obliges me to point out the intolerance of the views
the Baha'is here express so openly.  It is not a pretty site from my
vantage point.

--Kent

On Oct 23, 3:51 pm, John Ludgate <johnludg...@xxxxxx> wrote:
Hello Kent,

Each of us reflects the Revealed Word in a different manner just as
the

many colored objects in the world have different colors caused by
reflections from the one physical sun. Baha'u'llah tells us to focus
on

the Source of the Light and try to be the purest reflectors we can,
be

pious and humble and set our goals towards unity and light and
concord

instead of division and fire and hatred. The Bahai revealation will
result in the World becoming a most beautiful place. It appears that
you have a heartfelt concern for the future of the Faith but the
Ancient of Days is in charge so don't worry. Baha'u'llah has come
with

the "new wine skins". God will perfect His Light.

"Truth is one point which the foolish have multiplied." There is a
quote that goes something like: If you think you possess a truth that
someone else does not know, then tell them. If they accept what you
say

then good, if not then leave them to themselves. Also, when you talk
to

someone the Writings say: "use words as mild as milk" and your words
will be a "fount of wisdom". This has been very hard for me but I
keep

trying. "Consort with the followers of all religions." "Pray to God
and

He will give you Light."

There is another quote in the very beginning of Kitab i Iqan that
says

something like "unless and until he stops regarding the words and
deeds

of mortal men as the standard...." which is very beautiful and a
guiding light.

peace, unity and loving kindness,

john
John Ludgate
ph: 684-699-2097, fax: 699-2047, cell: 733-3566
On Oct 22, 2008, at 6:46 PM, compx2 wrote:

Hi Mike,

I am reading the primary literature, and despite your insistence,
the
literature does not state, show, or even clearly imply linearly
increased cancer risk.

You, however, extrapolate data to assert it.  The studies
themselves
continue to recommend moderate alcohol use.  You read into the
data
what you want to, and accuse me of not being able to do so.
Certainly, I could interpret the data any way I choose, but I am
rather letting the studies you cite interpret their own data.

And what they say is that moderate alcohol use is okay.  You,
however
,
extrapolate and interpret to make a point that is not in the
studies.
Why?  Is it your version of the Baha'i Faith that makes you do so?

--Kent

On Oct 21, 11:58 am, mikera...@xxxxxxxxx wrote:
The major problem I have here with both Tim's and Kent's position
is
that neither one seems to be reading the primary literature that I
am
citing in defense of my premise that alcohol is a carcinogen.
Whether
you drink one cup a day or more than two it only linearly increases
your cancer risk. About the only people who dispute this are Tim
 an
d
Kent. Based on what they are presenting, I can only assume that
they
are sifting through it all looking for one-liners that seem to
support
their position. Even worse, kent  cited a one liner in support of
the
notion that alcohol is not carcinogenic below a couple drinks a  
day,
only when you read this article you will see that indeed it is
stated
my exact premise. While there are a multitude of articles on the
subject proving my point, I'm going to stick with one kent cited
just
to keep it simple, and I'll abbreviate it, if you want the whole
article, just check back a few posts.

"Alcohol and Breast Cancer in Women
A Pooled Analysis of Cohort Studies

Stephanie A. Smith-Warner, PhD; Donna Spiegelman, <snip>

JAMA. 1998;279:535-540.

Objective.— To assess the risk of invasive breast cancer
associated
with total and beverage-specific alcohol consumption and to
evaluate
whether dietary and nondietary factors modify the association.
<snip>

Data Synthesis.— For alcohol intakes less than 60 g/d (reported
by>99%
of participants), risk increased linearly with increasing intake;

the pooled multivariate relative risk for an increment of 10 g/d of
alcohol (about 0.75-1 drink) was 1.09 (95Qonfidence interval
[CI],
1.04-1.13; P for heterogeneity among studies, .71). The
multivariate-
adjusted relative risk for total alcohol intakes of 30 to less than
60
g/d (about 2-5 drinks) vs nondrinkers was 1.41 (95% CI, 1.18-1.69).
Limited data suggested that alcohol intakes of at least 60 g/d were
not associated with further increased risk. The specific type of
alcoholic beverage did not strongly influence risk estimates. The
association between alcohol intake and breast cancer was not
modified
by other factors.

Conclusions.— Alcohol consumption is associated with a linear
increase
in breast cancer incidence in women over the range of consumption
reported by most women. Among women who consume alcohol regularly,
reducing alcohol consumption is a potential means to reduce breast
cancer risk."

 My point in citing this is that no where in the scientific
literature
is there any study relating to breast cancer that puts a lower
threshold value on the amount of alcohol that can be consumed
safely.
The risk of cancer increases linearly with consumption. Both Kent
and
Tim propose that there are lower non-carcinogenic limits to alcohol
consumption, a theory that is not supported in the primary
literature.
This paper is not alone in this claim. I'll recite one more paper
that
I encourage these two to review:

"Alcohol as a cause of Cancer
May 2008
Authors
Samara Lewis1, Suzanne Campbell2, Emma Proudfoot2, Adèle Weston2,
Trish
Cotter1, James F Bishop1

The risk alcohol poses for cancer is large. Four standard drinks a
day
increase the cancer risk by 22%
or with eight standard drinks a day the cancer risk increases by
90%.
For each standard drink per day,the risk of breast cancer
specifically
increases by around 10%. "<snip>

  Kent, how can you call yourself a fair minded person and fail
to
respect the research in these two papers. Your avoidance of
acknowledging this information casts serious doubt on your
sincerity
and credibility.

  What confuses people here is that the american cancer society
does
put an advisment out that alcohol consumption above two drinks per
day
increases your cancer risk, but fails to advise people about the
risks
below two drinks per day. Interestingly, they specifically state
that
there may be health benefits for certain cardiovascular patients
below
two drinks per day and that people should seek the counsul of their
primary care physician when deciding what to do. (Which is exactly
what the Baha'i position is). Both Kent and Tim are at best
providing
us with a poor reading of this advisement that would seem to suite
their own purposes.

  What's been pointed out to me is that regardless, Baha'u'llah
has
foridden this drink and anything

...

read more »- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Religious Tolerance
    ... important issues or in helping us move towards unity or truth. ... I enjoyed reading your tolerant and wise words. ... and universal prohibition of alcohol). ... increased cancer risk. ...
    (soc.religion.bahai)
  • Re: Religious Tolerance
    ... The truth I possess is that it is a good thing that Baha'is don't ... increased cancer risk. ... citing in defense of my premise that alcohol is a carcinogen. ...
    (soc.religion.bahai)
  • Re: Religious Tolerance
    ... Also "drinking too much alcohol can cause cancer". ... not associated with further increased risk. ... For each standard drink per day,the risk of breast cancer specifically ...
    (soc.religion.bahai)
  • Re: Religious Tolerance
    ... increased cancer risk. ... And what they say is that moderate alcohol use is okay. ... with total and beverage-specific alcohol consumption and to evaluate ...
    (soc.religion.bahai)
  • Re: Religious Tolerance
    ... increased cancer risk. ... And what they say is that moderate alcohol use is okay. ... with total and beverage-specific alcohol consumption and to evaluate ...
    (soc.religion.bahai)