en-us https://www.intensedebate.com/users/345639 Comments by Sen_McGlinn http://bahairants.com/new-pressures-brought-against-iranian-bahais-605.html#IDComment16692604 Farhan wrote" not judging and attributing faults to each other." precisely. You have not only decided that you know the "real story" - : disenrollement is a sanction for behaviour -- you have decided that that behaviour is judging and attributing faults to others - which you have just done. I am one of those you are attributing this fault to - but where's your evidence. I've written and published a lot, can you find one example of attributing faults that approaches your own blatant example? Do you expect to be expelled now? no? then perhaps there is something wrong with your reasoning. Run some diagnostics, see if the problem might be with the unfounded premise that started it Tue, 10 Mar 2009 12:55:00 +0000 http://bahairants.com/new-pressures-brought-against-iranian-bahais-605.html#IDComment16692604 http://bahairants.com/new-pressures-brought-against-iranian-bahais-605.html#IDComment16691272 Farhan, you seem to be fixated on the idea that expulsion is a punishment for something people have done. As I've point out (3x now) this is just a supposition on your part. The UHJ has not described these expulsions as punishments or sanctions, and does not tell the people involved that they have done something wrong. If you really cannot let go of your supposition, why not write to the UHJ and ask them: "when people are removed from the rolls of the Bahais community, as in the cases of Sen McGlinn and Alison Marshall, is this a sanction for something they have done?" If you are clear that you are not asking what individuals are thought to have done, but just how to interpret the new phenomenon of expulsions, you may get a straight answer. _Sen McGlinn Tue, 10 Mar 2009 11:50:36 +0000 http://bahairants.com/new-pressures-brought-against-iranian-bahais-605.html#IDComment16691272 http://bahairants.com/la-class-newsletter-35-606.html#IDComment16689501 see: a whole-hearted, yet restricted “yet” to the Revelation. This restricted “yet” should be "yes" Tue, 10 Mar 2009 11:22:40 +0000 http://bahairants.com/la-class-newsletter-35-606.html#IDComment16689501 http://bahairants.com/new-pressures-brought-against-iranian-bahais-605.html#IDComment16642864 You are assuming that people are disenrolled because they have done something, and are being punished. But the UHJ has never described disenrollment as a 'sanction' or indicated that there is something the disenrolled can do to get their rmembership back. There are at least 3 possibilities. disenrollment is: 1) a punishment for some act unknown that the UHJ thinks the person has done 2) a decision that a person is by nature not suitable for community membership 3) a sanction for unorthodox ideas the persion has, or people say they have Speculation is free -- but neither the disenrolled people or anyone else know anything, because the UHJ is not telling This is quite different to the closs of voting rights, Mon, 9 Mar 2009 18:44:27 +0000 http://bahairants.com/new-pressures-brought-against-iranian-bahais-605.html#IDComment16642864 http://bahairants.com/new-pressures-brought-against-iranian-bahais-605.html#IDComment16621877 I think you're just emoting Craig. I did get my disenrollment letter by registered post. The UHJ has never given reasons as far as I know, but has been willing to say what was not the reason, when asked. When Daniella Pinna wrote to the UHJ about my expulsion, they said that it was not because of the content of my book (as she had supposed). When someone else asked they said my expulsion was not based on review issues. You may think people are disenrolled for what they think and say, someone else may think they are disenrolled for something they've done, a third person may think that people are disenrolled because of the kind of person they are. It's all guesswork, because the UHJ doesn't explain its reasons. Mon, 9 Mar 2009 14:19:27 +0000 http://bahairants.com/new-pressures-brought-against-iranian-bahais-605.html#IDComment16621877 http://bahairants.com/new-pressures-brought-against-iranian-bahais-605.html#IDComment16620838 "there is ALWAYS a possibility of return if the person accepts to abide by community rules?" Or a possibility of a possibility, since no-one has been told they may never return. But I've re-applied twice and been turned down, and so far as I know, no-one who has been disenrolled has ever been accepted back. In my case at least, I've no indication that the NSA or Counsellors had anything to do with the decision, or any idea that it was coming. Such decisions are the prerogative of the UHJ alone, according to its constitution. Mon, 9 Mar 2009 14:10:33 +0000 http://bahairants.com/new-pressures-brought-against-iranian-bahais-605.html#IDComment16620838