One Reason Why I Will NEVER Convert to Baha'ism

Here are the gory details, straight from the Bahais themselves.

Abstract:

Whether Baha'is may practice self-defense in times of danger, and whether American Baha'is should purchase firearms.

From the texts you already have available it is clear that Bahá'u'lláh has stated that it is preferable to be killed in the path of God's service than to kill, and that organized religious attack against Bahá'ís should never turn into any kind of warfare, as this is strictly prohibited in our Writings.

So a Bahá'í is expected to "take one for the team" in the name of the faith? If a group of whacko Islamofascists were to set upon a Bahá'í temple with physical violence in mind, the Bahá'ís are supposed to simply stand by and let it happen?

A hitherto untranslated Tablet from 'Abdu'l-Bahá, however, points out that in the case of attack by robbers and highwaymen, a Bahá'í should not surrender himself, but should try, as far as circumstances permit, to defend himself, and later on lodge a complaint with the government authorities. In a letter written on behalf of the Guardian, he also indicates that in an emergency when there is no legal force at hand to appeal to, a Bahá'í is justified in defending his life. In another letter the Guardian has further point out that the assault of an irresponsible assailant upon a Bahá'í should be resisted by the Bahá'í, who would be justified, under such circumstances, in protecting his life.

How exactly is a Bahá'í (or anyone else, for that matter) to tell if the assailant is a responsible one versus an irresponsible one?

If the assailant is a responsible attacker, is then the Bahá'í adherent supposed to refrain from resisting?

What if the Bahá'í deems the attacker to be irresponsible, and later it's determined that the thug was indeed a responsible thug?

The House of Justice does not wish at the present time to go beyond the guidelines given in the above-mentioned statements. The question is basically a matter of conscience, and in each case the Bahá'í involved must use his judgment in determining when to stop in self-defense lest his action deteriorate into retaliation.

Oh no, the horrors of retaliation!

Of course the above principles apply also in cases when a Bahá'í finds himself involved in situations of civil disorder. We have, however, advised the National Spiritual Assembly of the United States that under the present circumstances in that country it is preferable that Bahá'ís do not buy nor own arms for their protection or the protection of their families.

Here we have it – an explicit proclamation from Bahá'í officialdom that firearms ownership is discouraged.

With that, I can safely say that I am not joining and will not join the Bahá'í faith.

---

FOR FURTHER REFERENCE

1. Self-Defense, Guidance on by Universal House of Justice, first written or published 1969-05-26

NOTES

1. Reposted –
   
   
   1. Personal blogs, micro-blogs, etc. – Facebook / Google Plus / Twitter / Wordpress / Xanga
      
      
   2. The Weekly Sedition – Facebook / Twitter / Wordpress / Yahoo!
      
      
   3. Tea Party Nation

---

Copyright © 2013 Mike Blessing. All rights reserved.
Produced by KCUF Media, a division of Extropy Enterprises.
This blog entry created with Notepad++.

bomb gun firearm steak knife Allah Aryan airline hijack

Gun Owners are the True 99 % -- BOTE Math on American Gun-Related Deaths

Current mood: irate

For the uninitiated, "BOTE" stands for "back of the envelope" – cocktail napkins rip and tear too much to used for anything other than as napkins.

32,000 – annual number of firearms-related deaths in America (source: CDC)

270,000,000 – number of guns in America's private sector (BATFE estimate – other estimates double or triple this number)

Now we simply divide the first number (32,000) by the second number (270,000,000) to get a guesstimate of the number of guns involved in fatal incidents in America. Granted, this is rather inaccurate in that it assumes that each fatality involved a separate gun – the recent spree killers in Aurora, Colorado and Newton, Connecticut that Senator Feinstein is gleefully using to justify her latest victim disarmament scheme used the same firearms to kill multiple people. The fact is, that VD movement was rather stagnant here in the States after the year 2000 – this is just what the Senator needed to kick-start it back to life. As the adage goes, "never let a crisis go to waste."

(32,000) / (270,000,000) = 0.0001185185 – that's 0.0118518519 % of American guns are the ones that "kill people in America" (guns don't kill people – when was the last time you saw one fly around on its own, load itself, point itself at anyone and pull its own trigger? But try telling that to an advocate of victim disarmament.)

So to comply with the Senator's demands, allegedly to prevent spree killers like Lanza and Horton, the other 99.9881481481 percent of American gun owners simply must give up their liberty and property. Never mind that the 99% here never engaged in such evil, nor have any desire to do so.

Never mind that the 1994 "assault weapon" ban signed by Waco Willie Clinton was a dismal failure in stopping such massacres (or any other sort of crime) – the 101 California Street shootings were carried out using two pistols that the State of California had declared illegal six years before (the crappy Intratec TEC-9). What Feinstein wants, Feinstein is determined to get, and to Hell with the truth, or the consequences.

Calculations done with Libre Office Calc

Here's some more from the international scene:

Figure 1 – Gun-related deaths vs guns per capita, by country
The data used to make the above graph [PDF]

Sources for the above graph

List of countries by firearm-related death rate, Number of guns per capita by country

Graph made using Gnumeric

---

NOTES

1. Reposted –
   
   
   1. Personal micro-blogs – Facebook / Google Plus / Twitter / Xanga
   2. Personal blogs – Wordpress / Xanga
   3. The Weekly Sedition – Facebook / Wordpress

---

Copyright © 2012 Mike Blessing. All rights reserved.

Produced by KCUF Media, a division of Extropy Enterprises. Webmaster Mike Blessing.

This blog entry created with Notepad++.

It's "Romney AND the Rules Committee"

Current mood: aggravated, annoyed, bitchy, cranky

Subject: It's "Romney AND the Rules Committee"
Date: Tuesday, 28 August 2012 21:54:41 MST
To: ABQ C4L, KCUF Media [Y!}, The Weekly Sedition [Y!]
BCC: [71 Republicans, Libertarians, etc.]

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Romney versus the Rules Committee
Date: Tuesday, 28 August 2012 15:42:01 -0400 (EDT)

8/28/2012 1:42 PM:

> It is a curious thing that although I have not yet finished studying the proposed Rules Changes and the many e-mails regarding them, some
> are hastening to condemn Mitt Romney for the rule proposal – despite the fact that all reports state it is the Republican Establishment
> faction of the Rules Committee that is behind the attempt.

I take it that the writer of this message didn't bother to watch any of today's C-SPAN coverage of the RNC Circus?

If anything, the GOP's rules changes were designed to shut out the Ron Paul people, on behalf of Romney.

Maybe this writer missed the parts of the vote count where the various speakers from the state delegations reported their states' votes, and the lady at the podium repeated the numbers for Romney back to the audience?

What happened there was that the lady repeated ONLY the numbers for Romney. In several instances, Ron Paul got more of a state's votes than Romney did, but Paul's votes weren't repeated back. For example, the Nevada delegation reported 17 votes for Paul and 6 for Romney, yet she only repeated back "6 votes – Romney."

So when I labeled this a "Coronation Circus" recently, I hit the bullseye:

What About the Coronation Circus in Tampa?

Because of this, a good bit of the Ron Paul people are determined not to vote for Romney. In fact, one of those in the New Mexico delegation contacted me late Friday night for some Gary Johnson bumper stickers and flash cards, so he could pass them out in Tampa. But since Steve Pearce reported that all 23 of New Mexico's delegation voted for Romney, I have to wonder if there was some last-minute re-arranging of the delegation, specifically to remove those supporting Paul.

Some will switch to supporting Gary Johnson. Others will write in Ron Paul. Still others will either cast a blank (not vote for anyone in the presidential race) or stay home entirely on election day.

> Those who dislike Romney are quick to pass judgement on him without knowing what is actually taking place in D.C. They howl with a sort of
> pathetic despair, toward which one cannot feel any sympathy at all. Such howlers are playing directly into the hands of the Leftists.

I'm not at all "quick to pass judgement" against Romney – I've been researching his brand of Big R socialism and mercantilism for the past few months now.

> I'm on the phone a lot with many voters. Some tell terrible stories about what the present economic climate is doing to them. I feel deeply
> for their anger and their plight. And I admire their fortitude. They will vote despite their anguish. Would that the howlers had as much
> gumption and clarity of mind.

It's not "fortitude," it's cognitive dissonance, where you tell yourself that eating from the dumpster is in fact gourmet dining. That way, when you repeat it to others, you really do believe it a bit and thus you're not really lying.

> This comment from me is to warn my readers not to be taken in by the howlers, not to be swayed by them, not to give up the fight to make
> Romney the next POTUS. Most of all it is to remind us all that we must not give up our commitment to shift the direction of the Republican
> Party toward a free-market, limited government restoration of individual rights.

Seriously – what's to like about Romney from a "Tea Party" mindset of standing up for free markets, Constitutionally-limited government, individual rights and public-sector fiscal restraint?

Romney as Governor of Massachusetts signed off on an "assault weapons" ban, stumped for the Brady Bill, and helped to socialize health care.

OK, DON'T take it from me.

See what Carla Howell (who ran against Romney for Governor in 2002) said about him:

LP Monday Message: Mitt Romney = Big Government

See this article from Reason magazine:

Consultant in Chief

See what Gun Owners of America has to say:

Where Does Romney Stand Today on the Second Amendment?

Romney signs off on permanent assault weapons ban

> We must be on guard against those who continue to rail against Romney – no matter whether they identify themselves as: "conservatives,"
> "Republicans" or "patriots." Such individuals will not help our effort to stop this nation from going "Forward" into the abyss of socialism.
> No matter what their protestations, the howlers are attempting to demoralize us with their bad-mouthing of Mr. Romney, with their
> sarcasm and hostility toward him and their obnoxiousness.

Let me shorten this paragraph for you:

"Block up your ears, shut up and do as the RNC tells you."

> Keep in mind that no matter what your evaluation of Romney – and I personally am coming to value him more highly the more I research him –
> the alternative will make doubly difficult our struggle to restore the ideals our Founding Fathers identified in the Declaration of
> Independence and in our Constitution. It is these ideals that are most important. With Romney we have better odds in our fight.

Romney as a guardian of the ideals set forth in the Constitution and Declaration of Independence? That's good for a laugh, but not much else.

For example, I've noticed that the meme the campaign is pushing is that Obama cut Medicare to fund Obamacare.

How does defending a 1960s-era socialist wealth-redistribution scheme against a 21st-century socialist wealth-redistribution scheme make you a "free marketer" ?

> The Rules Committee Establishment Republicans as best as I can make out, are on a collision course. We need to get rid of them, not a man
> who can benefit this nation far more than the howlers care to consider.

How will Romney "benefit this nation far more," exactly?

Maybe he'll re-make Obamacare into a federal version of RomneyCare?

How does that support free-markets and limited government?

---

NOTES

1. Reposted –
   
   
   1. Personal blogs – Blogspot / Wordpress / Xanga / Yahoo!
      
   2. KCUF Media – Yahoo!
      
   3. LPUSA / LPNM – [lpnm-discuss] Yahoo! Group / New Mexico Liberty Yahoo! Group

---

Copyright © 2012 Mike Blessing. All rights reserved.
Produced by KCUF Media, a division of Extropy Enterprises. Webmaster Mike Blessing.
This blog entry created with Notepad++.

The Title Says It All

Current mood: bitchy, cranky

The title of this video clip – "Why our Country is Going Down The Drain" – really is self-explanatory.

---

NOTES

1. Reposted –
   
   1. Personal blogs – Wordpress / Xanga

---

Copyright © 2012 Mike Blessing. All rights reserved.

Produced by KCUF Media, a division of Extropy Enterprises. Webmaster Mike Blessing.

This blog entry created with Notepad++.