by trident765 (a Baha'i who is shadow-banned on /r/bahai)
Last night I went to Feast, and they played this new video commissioned by the Universal House of Justice called "Dawn of the Light". A few months ago they played another video called "Light to the World", which was extremely boring. When "Dawn of the Light" started playing, I realized it is was the same style of video as "Light to the World". And yes, "Dawn of the Light" was more of the same boring shit. Here is a link to the "Dawn of the Light" video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4oHgOLZA-o
"Dawn of the Light" is a video that has no point or substance. None of the speakers say anything important or interesting - it's just empty lip service to the Baha'i Faith. The reason none of the speakers say anything of importance is because what they say is not the point of the video. The point of the video is to convey an image of the Baha'i Faith, and the filmmakers do this primarily by appealing to the senses: Visuals of nature, architecture, and scenes of young people playing the ukelele and singing about harmony. The substance of what the speakers say is an afterthought.
Instead of making a thought-provoking video that would encourage people to take the action to improve the Baha'i community, a pointless video is made of people talking about unity and harmony. I think Abdul Baha would have hated the video, because Abdul Baha hated the sort of pointless idle talk that was abundant in the video. Abdul Baha says:
Last night I went to Feast, and they played this new video commissioned by the Universal House of Justice called "Dawn of the Light". A few months ago they played another video called "Light to the World", which was extremely boring. When "Dawn of the Light" started playing, I realized it is was the same style of video as "Light to the World". And yes, "Dawn of the Light" was more of the same boring shit. Here is a link to the "Dawn of the Light" video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-4oHgOLZA-o
"Dawn of the Light" is a video that has no point or substance. None of the speakers say anything important or interesting - it's just empty lip service to the Baha'i Faith. The reason none of the speakers say anything of importance is because what they say is not the point of the video. The point of the video is to convey an image of the Baha'i Faith, and the filmmakers do this primarily by appealing to the senses: Visuals of nature, architecture, and scenes of young people playing the ukelele and singing about harmony. The substance of what the speakers say is an afterthought.
Instead of making a thought-provoking video that would encourage people to take the action to improve the Baha'i community, a pointless video is made of people talking about unity and harmony. I think Abdul Baha would have hated the video, because Abdul Baha hated the sort of pointless idle talk that was abundant in the video. Abdul Baha says:
All over the world one hears beautiful sayings extolled and noble precepts admired...But all these sayings are but words and we see very few of them carried into the world of action.and
If we are true Bahá’ís speech is not needed. Our actions will help on the world, will spread civilization, will help the progress of science, and cause the arts to develop. Without action nothing in the material world can be accomplished, neither can words unaided advance a man in the spiritual Kingdom. It is not through lip-service only that the elect of God have attained to holiness, but by patient lives of active service they have brought light into the world.Today the Baha'i Faith is a religion of purely lip service and zero action. Baha'is talk about how great the Baha'i Faith is - that's all modern Baha'i communities consist of. All talk and no substance. Baha'is never take action to build the Baha'i Civilization outlined in the books. Baha'is do not even THINK about how to take the action to build the Baha'i Civilization.
Why was that guy banned from the Baha'i subreddit? Probably because of statements like this:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.reddit.com/r/nonmorons/comments/crw2jn/why_lowclass_women_have_larger_breasts/
{{{I live in an area (New York) where there are extremes of wealth and poverty, and class segregation. One minute you'll be standing in a ghetto, but walk a few miles and you will be in a wealthy neighborhood.
There is no question that low class/low IQ women have much bigger breasts than high class/high IQ women. You see this between races where high IQ groups (e.g. Asian American women) have smaller breasts than low IQ groups. But even within a race, low class white women always have much bigger breasts than high class white women. I see lots of female PhDs from Ivy League schools at my workplace, and not a single one of them has big breasts. But if I take a walk in a low class neighborhood in NYC, it seems like every other woman has huge breasts. I will attempt to explain what I think is the reason.
The assumption I will base my argument on is this: Low class groups are more promiscuous than high class groups. I think this is an obvious fact so I will not attempt to justify it.
If a group is promiscuous, and has low impulse control (both of these have been shown to correlate with low IQ), then you are going to see more children born as a result of one night stands. Both because more promiscuity is more casual sex, and because low impulse control results in lower usage of birth control.
One night stands occur when a woman tempts a Chad - when a woman succeeds in sexually arousing a Chad, and they have sex. The women who succeed in tempting Chad the most will be women with large breasts or large buttocks, and so these women are more likely to have a bastard child by Chad. And so in a promiscuous/low IQ group, big breasted women will reproduce at higher rates than small breasted women, and so the average breast size of this group will keep increasing with each generation.
But in a monogamous group, where one night stands are non-existent, the "Chad" of this group would not select a woman simply for having large breasts, because there are so many more important qualities to consider for a long term relationship. In a promiscuous culture, a woman with a horrible, nagging personality can have Chad's kids as long as she is able to seduce Chad for one night using her big breasts. This is not the case in cultures where Chad would have to marry the woman in order to have sex with her. In such cultures, Chad would probably choose the woman who nags less but has smaller breasts over the nagging woman with big breasts.}}}