My Story As A Bahá'í

by Darrick T. Evenson

This article is not copyrighted. 18 pages.

I was born in Los Angeles, California, in 1960. My father was a Theosophist, and my mother Agnostic. I joined the Mormon Church while in the U.S. Marine Corps Reserves in 1979. I later served as a Missionary for the LDS Church in San Jose and San Francisco, California, from 1983 to 1985.

Joseph Smith's 1990-91 Prophecies

In 1980, while a Mormon only for a brief time, I visited a local "Christian" bookstore, and ran accross an entire shelf of anti-Mormon books. These books confused me, and I spent the next 17 months (full-time) investigating anti-Mormon claims. This including meeting many anti-Mormon authors (there are about 50 full-time anti-Mormon lecturers in North America). I was successful in refuting almost all anti-Mormon claims (i.e. that the Church was false and Mormonism a fraud and cult). However, there was one anti-Mormon claim that I could not refute; the 1890-91 Prophecies of Joseph Smith.

Joseph Smith claimed to be a Prophet of God. He claimed that Jesus and "the Father" appeared to him in a vision in 1820. He claimed that many angels appeared to him. He claimed that one of them showed him ancient records (on gold tablets) which he translated into English; it becoming known as The Book of Mormon. Joseph Smith prophecied that Christ would return in the years 1890-91. Anti-Mormons use these prophecies to "prove" that Joseph Smith was a false prophet.I searched, asked Mormon historians, and searched again for many months for answers to refute this. I had found none. I only found further evidence that Mormons were expecting Christ to return "in His Glory" in the years 1890-91. Mormon historians and others offerred only the lamest excuses on why Christ didn't appear in those years: "the members of the Church weren't prepared" or "the Lord decided to delay His coming" etc. None of them satisfied me; because they could be used to "explain-away" any unfulfilled prophecy--including all false prophecies!

Finds Baha'i Center

I decided to pray to God, asking Him to reveal the truth regarding these prophecies; whether they were from God, or simply false prophecies. Soon after that I (now working as a security patrolman in Los Angeles) was given an area to patrol near Beverly Hills. In this small area was the old Los Angeles Baha'i Center (on Pico Blvd.). I spent most of my lunch hours in the Center; reading books and asking questions. Realizing the claims of Baha'u'llah, I asked many people there, "Do the years 1890-91 have any significance in the Baha'i Faith?" I was always told, "Well, 1844 does, 1863 does, but...no, the years 1890-91 have no particular significance!"

Called to a Mission

After moving to Tacoma, Washington, I was called (in 1983) to serve as a full-time Missionary for the LDS Church. Having faith, I decided to go. However, I still was not content with the "answers" I'd received regarding Joseph Smith's 1890-91 prophecies. The Baha'is had given me nothing to satisfy my need. I decided to go to God again in prayer. I knew of the Universal House of Justice, and that they claimed to be inspired of God. I prayed to God again, asking Him to reveal the truth; asking to "meet" one of the members of the Universal House of Justice, because "if he doesn't have the answers I am seeking [i.e. if the years 1890-91 have any significance in the Faith] then nobody does!"

Meets Charles Wolcott (over the phone)

I was assigned to to the Missionary Training Center in Provo, Utah, for three weeks of instruction. Then, I was flown to the California San Jose Mission (which included San Francisco, San Jose, and all cities in between). I was assigned first to Morgan Hill. The very first night there, I had an overwhelming urge to call the Baha'is. I looked in the San Jose telephone book, and called a number. I got a recorded message, but at the end another number was given "for further information". I called the number and got a woman. I asked the woman if the years 1890-91 had any significance in the Baha'i Faith. I was told "no, but you should ask Marsha Gilpatrick...her father is on the Universal House of Justice. She may know the answer!" I was given and called her number. I called Marsha, and asked her the same question. Marsha replied, "No, I don't think so, but let me ask my father! He's Charles Wolcott...he's a Member of the Universal House of Justice, and he's visiting us here from Haifa for a few days, but he's very ill. I'll see if he's well enough to speak with you!"

Charles Wolcott, an original House member first elected in 1963 who was still a member of the House, came to the phone. I introduced myself, and asked him if the years 1890-91 had any significance in the Baha'i Faith. He excused himself, and, in a few minutes, came back and appeared to read me a quote. Later, I discovered the quote was from H.M. Balyuzi's book _Baha'u'llah_:

"In that year, 1890, Baha'u'llah visited Haifa, and pitched His tent on Mount Carmel. To the Mountain of God came the Lord of Hosts, and the prophecies of old as well as His own emphatic promise were fulfilled." (Baha'u'llah-The Word Made Flesh,p.63)

Darrick told "Joseph Smith not a Prophet!"

Several weeks later, I decided to meet the Gilpatricks. My missionary companion didn't want to go, but another missionary (a former Baha'i from Alaska) said he wanted to go. At the Gilpatricks I asked if Baha'is considered Joseph Smith to be a Prophet? Mr. Gilpatrick retrived a book from his shelf and quoted from it that "Joseph Smith is not considered to be a Prophet--minor or otherwise." I was devastated. I had felt as if my prayers were answered, but now it seemed as if they hadn't. If Joseph Smith was not a Prophet (i.e. "inspired of God"), then, of course, he could not have prophecied of Baha'u'llah! The other missionary told me that he was a Mormon who had joined the Faith a few years previous, and had left it and returned to the Church for basically the same reason. We had a pleasant dinner with the Gilpatricks. My missionary companion for the evening did not reveal to them that he was a former Baha'i. We thanked them, and left. On the drive back to the missionary apartment, we both told each other that Baha'u'llah couldn't be Whom He claimed to be.

I fulfilled my mission, and came back home to Tacoma, Washington, in 1985. In late 1985 I wrote a defense of the Mormon Church called The Gainsayers; which was published in 1989, and can still be found for sale in most LDS bookstores. In 1987 I decided to investigate the Faith again. Even though I had faith in Jesus Christ, my belief in Joseph Smith was wavering; because of his unfulfilled 1890-91 prophecies. I contemplated whether I could believe in Baha'u'llah and not in Joseph Smith; if I could accept the claims of Baha'u'llah solely on His own merit. While the Spirit told me that Baha'u'llah was true, many of the things that Baha'is told him eventually turned me off again (like a denial of the Resurrection, that the Bible was "full of errors and invented stories", etc.). I met Robert Staufer in Seattle at the Seattle Baha'i "bookstore" (then only a small collection in a small room in an old hotel near the University of Washington), and he did much to dispell many of the inaccurate statements Baha'is had been telling me. Yet, there were still some insurmountable obstacles. Baha'is told me that Jesus slowly rotted away in the tomb, and that He never appeared to anyone after His death, that the Gospels were just "metaphorical parables" after His death, etc. I couldn't accept this! I knew it was false. By 1988 I had stopped studying the Faith. By 1990, I was inactive from the Mormon Church, and had no interest in the Baha'i Faith. I decided to go back to God, one more time, in prayer.

Joseph Smith is a "Seer"

I asked God again to reveal the truth to me; whether I should go back to the LDS Church, remain an independent Christian, or become a Baha'i. Soon thereafter I got an urge to visit the Seattle Baha'i bookstore (now quite a nice little bookstore in another location), and there I found a book in which it said that Shoghi Effendi was asked about Joseph Smith, and the Guardian replied, "Joseph Smith was a Seer, not a Prophet, and he had high standards". I was intrigued by this. I later discovered that in Shi'a Islam "Seers" (called "Muhaddaths") were men and women who received Divine Revelation, and the visitation of angels, but who were not "Prophets" (at least not in the Qur'anic sense of the term). I finally thought I had found the answer, but other things Baha'is told me prevented my from declaring my belief until 1994. It was then that I also discovered Baha'u'llah's Tablet of Carmel; which He wrote in 1891, on Mount Carmel. This was His "Great Announcement" to the World-at-large of His Mission. This made 1891 even more significant than 1863; when He privately declared His Station to the Babis. I could now see that the years 1890-91 were extremely significant years in the Baha'i Faith; although the vast great majority of Baha'is didn't know it.

I still couldn't declare until I had discovered, this time in Riverside, California, of the Mystical Islamic concept of ta'wil (the esoteric interpretation of the literal Verses of Scripture). The more I read about ta'wil, the more I could see that 'Abdu'l-Baha was giving "ta'wil" to explain the "esoteric meanings" of Jesus' resurrection. But the main rule of ta'wil is that the batin (esoteric) meanings cannot replace nor negate the zahir (literal) meaning of a Verse. The more I studied this concept the more I could see that 'Abdu'l-Baha's explanations of Jesus' resurrection in Some Answered Questions was not a denial of a literal resurrection, but a denial of a resurrection of the "physical" body. 'Abdu'l-Baha spoke of the "heavenly body"; which was not physical/material, but could be seen in "visions". About this time I read an article by a Baha'i named Joel Smith where he shows that Jesus' resurrection is referred to as a "vision" in the Greek. I came to the conclusion that 'Abdu'l-Baha DID NOT DENY the Gospel accounts, but that He was givin "ta'wil", and that Jesus arose in His heavenly/spiritual/astral/subtle/ethereal body, and not in His physical/elemental/temporal/material body. AT LAST! My final "hurdle" to becoming a Baha'i was passed!

Declaration in 1994 and the Controversy about Abortion

I finally declared in 1994, in Riverside, California. I had studied the Faith for many years. The last obstacle to joining the Faith (Jesus' Resurrection) had been answered; again, not by the Baha'is, but via my prayers and God's direction. Yet, only a Baha'i for about 4 months, I found another obstacle, and this time, it would cause me to resign from the Faith (in 1996).

I had always been Pro-Life. I'd always believed that the child in the womb was just that; a "child" in the womb. While in Riverside the Chair of the LSA asked me what I did for a living. At that time I was working for a researcher with Lively Communications; which publishes information against the radical Gay Rights movement, and also Pro-Life publications. She gasped and said, "WHAAAAAAAAAT!!! You just CAN'T DO THAT!!! You can't do it!!!" I asked her why, and she told me that the "Faith is 100% Pro-Choice! To oppose abortion rights was to violate one of the Principles of the Faith!" I asked her which one, and we got into a conversation about abortion. I asked her to show me where it said that Baha'is could "make their own decision" regarding abortion. She told me that the American Baha'i frequently publishes articles to that effect.

Guardian Says "Abortion Forbidden!"

Over the next two years I would discover that, in fact, the Faith was not "Pro-Choice", but, rather, moderately Pro-Life. I studied the subject of abortion in the Holy Texts of the world's Revealed Religions, and found that all of them were pro-Life. The oldest and most reliable Holy Texts and Holy Laws of the Jews, Zoroastrians, Buddhists, Hindus, Christians, Muslims, and Babis all condemn abortion. I discovered that the prohibition against abortion that began in the Dispensation of Moses was not abrogated by Jesus; nor Muhammad. I discovered that during the time of the Umayyid Caliphs (who were heavily influenced by Aristolian thought) abortion was permissible for up to 4 months after conception; since Aristotle taught that the soul didn't enter the body until the "time of quickening" (when the mother felt the infant move in her womb). I also discovered that, in the time of The Bab, in Persia, there were many potions women could buy in order to produce an abortion; if it was within that 4 month period (and post-quickening illegal abortions were often ignored by authorities). In 1865 a German named Polak wrote of his years in Persia (about the same time of The Bab). One historian who reviewed Polak's book wrote:

"In Persia, according to Polak, abortion is regularly practiced to prevent illegitimate births; and legislation ignores the crime." (New Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge 2:55)

The Bab, of course, knew that Persian women used potions to enduce abortions. He did not agree with the Shi'ite Muslims that a "soul" did not enter the womb until the 4th month. The Bab wrote that the soul came into being at conception. This is why The Bab outlawed abortion in His book of Holy Laws: the Qayyumu'l-Asma.

Prof. E.G. Browne, the great Orientalist, read the Quyyumu'l-Asma, and commented about one section:

"Divorce appears to be forbidden, as well as the use of drugs to produce abortion." (Selections from the Writings of E.G. Brown on the Babi and Baha'i Religions, p.214)

The Holy Book of Laws in the Baha'i Faith is the Kitab-i-Aqdas. Baha'u'llah abrogated certain laws in the Qayyumu'l-Asma; such as divorce, the kissing of rings, etc. Baha'u'llah did not abrogate the law against abortion. That which is not abrogate REMAINS part of the Holy Law!

The Kitab-i-Aqdas was never supposed to be a complete set of laws! It is merely an Addendum to the Babi book of holy laws; the Qayummu'l-Asma; which itself is merely an Addendum to the Holy Law of Islam; the Qu'ran.

In other words, the Qur'an plus the Qayummu'l-Asma plus the Kitab-i-Aqdas is the sacred Word of God and His Holy Laws. What is NOT mentioned in these Holy Books, and in the other Holy Writings of the Central Figures, or by Shoghi Effendi, falls upon the Universal House of Justice.

Abortion IS mentioned in the Qayummu'l-Asma; of which the Kitab-i-Aqdas is simply the "completion" of. Abortion is "forbidden"!

In Arabic the word "forbidden" is HARAM; it means something ABSOLUTELY FORBIDDEN! It does not mean "discouraged" or "recommended" or "neutral". There are other Arabic words for that. In Sh'ite Islam there are 5:

*Forbidden (Haram)
*Discouraged (Makrah)
*Neutral (Muhbah)
*Recommended (Mustahab)
*Mandatory/Obligatory (Wajib)

In the Holy Book of Laws abortion is "HARAM".

In the Baha'i Faith adultery, homosexual acts, sex-before-marriage, and drinking alcohol is FORBIDDEN; it means "not allowed". It does not mean "personal choice".

In the Baha'i Faith smoking is DISCOURAGED (Makruh); meaning it is recommended against, but allowed.

According to the Holy Law of the Bab abortion is FORBIDDEN. According to Shoghi Effendi abortion is FORBIDDEN. According to the Universal House of Justice abortion for birth-control is FORBIDDEN.

What does "forbidden" mean?

a) personal choice.
b) up to the woman.
c) neutral
d) NOT allowed!

Choose one.

The Bab, as a Manifestation of God, Who revealed the Will of God, made abortion FORBIDDEN. Baha'u'llah did not abrogate this Holy Law. The Kitab-i-Aqdas is merely the "conclusion" of the Qayummu'l-Asma. I also discovered that both Baha'u'llah and 'Abdu'l-Baha referred to the "child in the womb"; using the term "child" instead of some other term. I also discovered that the Guardian said that the soul was created at conception, and not the time of quickening as was believed by Muslim jurists (based upon Aristotle's supposition). The Manifestations and Prophets of God were always clear: abortion was the killing of a human soul.

Of course, from my years of doing research for the Pro-Life Movement, I already knew that the so-called "Pro-Choice Movement" was founded by Margaret Sanger and her allies; all of them Eugenecists and Neo-Malthusians. All of them white racists. And the irony was that none of them believing in the "woman's right to choose". All of them believed that poor women should be forcibly sterilized, or have forced abortions if they did not consent to have them themselves. Very few of the general public know that the first Board of Directors of the Birth Control Review (the predecessor of Planned Parenthood International) had a Nazi eugenecist and the Imperial Grand Cyclops of the Ku Klux Klan of Massachusetts as members. Today's "Pro-Choice Movement" is the classic "Big Lie", and, as Hitler said, it works quite well!

Shoghi Effendi wrote a letter himself to a Believer when he was asked about abortion, and he wrote:

"The practice of abortion--which is absolutely criminal as it involves the deliberate destruction of human life--is forbidden in the Cause." (Shoghi Effendi to an individual Believer, 25 August 1939).

"The soul or spirit of the individual comes into being with the conception of his physical body." (Shoghi Effendi, High Endeavors, p.71)

"Birth control procedures which allow the ovum to be fertilized but do not permit the fertilized ovum to develop are thus not permissible,...." (Universal House of Justice, 3 January, 1993)

"Regarding the practice of abortion; as no specific reference has been made to the subject in the Writings of Baha'u'llah, it devolves upon the International House of Justice to definitely pronounce upon it. There can be no doubt, however, that this practice, involving as it does the destruction of human life, is to be strongly deprecated." (Letter written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi to an individual believer, 12 November 1940)

"Abortion merely to prevent the birth of an unwanted child is strictly forbidden in the Cause. There may, however, be instances in which an abortion would be justified by medical reasons, and legislation on this matter has been left to the Universal House of Justice." (Lights of Guidance 2nd Edition p.34)

Notice what the Guardian says:

*"Abortion is FORBIDDEN".

Notice what the House says:

*"Abortion merely to prevent the birth of an unwanted child is STRICTLY FORBIDDEN IN THE CAUSE".

Remarkably, many Baha'is interpret the above guidelines as giving the woman "the right to choose" in all circumstances! Others seem to interpret the word "forbidden" as meaning "recommended" or "suggested".

I have been told by a number of Baha'is, "I'm not pro-Choice, but OF COURSE I believe in a woman's right to choose!"

Women in Indian and China also sometimes "choose" to kill a child (sometimes up to 5 years old). Why? For fear of poverty. Should they receive any punishment? Is that a woman's right to? If not, why not? When does a "child" begin? 'Abdu'l-Baha and Shoghi Effendi said "at conception". That when the right-to-life begins.

Some will say, "The House has said that the decision is up to the woman and her physcian".

FALSE! The House has said that elective abortion (abortion as a means of birth-control) is ABSOLUTELY FORBIDDEN in the Faith! Non-elective abortion, for "valid medical reasons", is still allowed. But not for birth-control; merely because the child is unwanted.

Abortion Prohibition Ignored By American NSA

About 1995 the NSA of the U.S. published a book for New Believers called So Great An Honor!. I read it, and _nowhere_ was abortion mentioned. I called the National Center in Evanston, Illinois, and inquired about this. I was told by a total of 6 people there (everyone I asked) that "abortion was a woman's right and her personal decision". I was told that I had "misread" statement by the Guardian and the Universal House of Justice. Two of the people I spoke with were directors of Offices. I was not allowed to speak to Robert C. Henderson. I wrote Dr. Henderson and asked about this, but never got a reply. I called his secretary, and was told that "abortion is a political question, and, since Baha'is cannot get involved in politics, the National Spiritual Assembly has decided to leave it as a personal decision, and not to comment upon it!"

I was stunned!

I knew this was nothing more than a "cop out", and excuse! How in the world is merely telling New Believers what the Guardian and House had to say about abortion "getting involved in politics"? I knew it was a lie; an excuse to tow the Pro-Choice party-line; the Guardian and House "be damned"! I knew from studying most of the world's religions that some men, when they gain power, simply ignore those parts of their professed religion that they find objectionable. The Qur'an calles these men, and women, "Hypocrites". Yet the hypocrites see themselves as very "enlightened" people. They care not what their Holy Texts say when they disagree with it. Rather, they have their own agenda, and simply ignore any doctrine or law that comes into conflict with it. I knew the Baha'i Faith was true, but, like all churches and religions, it had it's hypocrites too. These people often see themselves as "agents of change", and this is why they often seek positions of power and influence.

Angered, I wrote an angry letter threatening to expose to the African-American press that The Bab and Baha'u'llah owned black slaves (Baha'u'llah freed all black Baha'i slaves in 1874) if the NSA of the U.S. did not publish the Guardian's Pro-Life statements in The American Baha'i. I was very upset; extremely angry at the hypocrisy of some of those at the National Centre. Yet, I should have known. The Standard Message attracts social-activists, and most social-activists today are Pro-Choice. So, it would make sense that they would do anything to "explain-away" those laws and directives they personally didn't agree with.

Later, of course, I calmed down. True, 6 people at the National Baha'i Centre had told me "Abortion is a woman's choice". Yet, they were MISinformated, or, deliberating ignoring or reinterpreting what the Guardian and the House had clearly declared.

Over the next year I decided that I had been WRONG to threated expose'. It was an emotional reaction. I should have EDUCATED.

Over the next few years some pro-Choice "Baha'is" were determined to discredit me by any-and-all-means-necessary. They would call people pretending to be me, or write things on the Internet in my name which I had never written; all in attempts to SCARE other Baha'is, and to create a climate of suspecion about me among Baha'is. IT WORKED! It worked better than they could have dreamed! Instead of trying to limit this, a few Auxiliary Board Members for Protection promoted it; thinking they were doing God, and the Faith, a great service.

Visit to Salt Lake City Community

In early 1996 I visited Salt Lake City, Utah. I attempted to teach the Baha'is there how to teach Mormons the Faith; using the prophecies of Joseph Smith. I discovered a small clique of Anti-Mormon Baha'is who accused me of lying about talking with Charles Wolcott, and they insisted that Joseph Smith was a "fraud" and had no visions whatsoever. They also insinuated that I was lying about Shoghi Effendi's statement (in pilgrims' notes) that Joseph Smith was "a Seer" and that "he had high standards". I later got a signed letter from Marsha Gilpatrick restating that my discussion with her father during his brief visit was true. I also got the pilgrim's notes about Joseph Smith being a "Seer". I sent them in a letter to the LSA of Salt Lake City. Instead of getting an apology, I was accused of trying to stir-up contention; again from the same small clique that accused me of lying in the first place. In the end, I wasn't surprised that so few Mormons in Utah had joined the Faith in the last 100 years. While most of the Baha'is in and around Salt Lake City were open and receptive, that small clique would do anything to make sure that the prophecies of Joseph Smith were not used in teaching; even disrupting the Community to prevent it.

Active and faithful Mormons will never be attracted to the Faith via it's "race unity" and "world peace" and "equality of men and women" message. Never! Only a small trickle of disgruntled or inactive Mormons and ex-Mormons will ever become Seekers, and not many of them either. The Faith will never have any significant growth in Utah as long as the Baha'is of Utah refuse to recognize Joseph Smith as an inspired SEER (as Shoghi Effendi did recognize him as such) and use his prophecies to attract and teach Mormons.

Charges of Racism

Another reason I left the Faith was because Baha'is were shunning me because I was "racist". I was shunned because I did not believe the races were equal in intelligence. After many years of study I came to the conclusion: *Asians are most intelligent, followed by Caucasians, then Malaysians, then Africans, then Amerinds, then Aboriginals and Melanesians. I based this upon the following.... *Ape-men had smaller brains than we do. Thus, brain-size equates with intelligence. *Homo Sapiens have larger brains than Homo Erectus *Human races have variation in brain-size; with Asians having the largest and Aboriginals (Australia) and Melanesians (New Guinea and Melanesia) having the smallest. *Asians always seem to do best at math music and language ability. This is why one finds them overproportionately in higher-math classes at university. They are simply "better" at these abilities (generally speaking). *Aboriginals and Melanesians have the smallest brains (on average) of all humans. Pure-blooded Aboriginese do not seem to have the ability to do higher math. Aboriginal children cannot learn as fast as white children, and the few Asian children in Australia always learn faster and do better on tests and math and language and music than their white classmates. I told the Baha'is this over the years, when the subject came up, and they screamed "RACIST!!!" I pointed out to them that "racism" was the belief that one's own race was superior to all others, and I was not Asian. They didn't care. They said that Baha'u'llah and 'Abdu'l-Baha taught that the races were equal. I told them this was not the case, and they never said any such thing. They didn't care. I was shunned. Baha'is emphazie "Race Unity" but one of the Principles of the Baha'i Faith is that Religion and Science must agree, and that if you believe a religious doctrine that does not agree with science, you must abandone it. Well...ALL scientific studies ever done on race and intelligence show the races are not equal in intelligence. I told this to the Baha'is. They had no argument, but woudl say "YOU'RE A RACIST!" and then shun me completely. Nothing in the works of Baha'u'llah or 'Abdu'l-Baha says the races are equal in intelligence; only that the races are like children in a family, all are different in intelligence and temperment, but all should be equally loved. THAT is what I believe too. But, unfortunately, I didn't "tow the politically-correct" Party-line that all races are equal in all things. I knew that was a LIE, and God has nothing to do with lies.

Darrick Resigns from the Faith

By late 1997 I'd had enough! I had enough of being called a liar. I had had enough of the false rumors being spread around about me. I had had enough of the lame excuses; that to merely inform Baha'is as to what The Bab and Shoghi Effendi had to say about abortion was "getting the Faith involved in partisan politics". So, I resigned from the Faith; charging off an angry letter to Dr. Henderson. I charged him with hypocrisy; with allowing the murder of innocent children in the womb by his ignoring of what the Guardian and House said, and by ignoring Pro-Choice Baha'is like the LSA Chair in Riverside, but also with trying to crush Pro-Life Baha'i speech by calling it "political". To be fair with Dr. Henderson, I do not know for sure if he is Pro-Choice. Perhaps he feels that openly discussing what the Guardian and House had to say about abortion will hurt the Faith. My reply to that is that the Faith doesn't need radical Liberals who will ignore many of the Laws of Baha'u'llah. The great majority of the rank-and-file religious people of the U.S. are at least moderately Pro-Life, and the Faith should have no fear in openly making it's stand known. The Faith would no doubt lose a few hundred radicals, but it would gain legions of traditional religious people!

NSAUSA Supports CEDAW Treaty

I learned that the Baha'i Office of External Affairs, headed by Kit Crosby, is active in working for the ratification of the Convention on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (CEDAW).

I discovered that the Baha'i Office of External Affairs is being used as the American office for the ratification of CEDAW!

What is CEDAW?

CEDAW is an international treaty that claims to works towards the elimination of all forms of discrimination against women! Sounds good doesn't it?

But...

CEDAW wants to overturn all laws restricting abortion in all countries that ratify the treaty. Let's read:

"CEDAW affirms women's REPRODUCTIVE RIGHTS as human rights and requires ratifying states to eliminate discrimination against women in healthcare and family planning. Specifically, CEDAW obliges governments to develope family codes that guarantees women's rights 'to decide freely and responsibly on the number and spacing of children and to have access to the information, education, and MEANS to enable them to exercise those rights." (Introduction and Article 16e, CEDAW)

"States Parties shall take all appropriate measures to eliminate discrimination against women in the field of health care in order to ensure, on a basis of equality of men and women, access to health care services, including those related to family planning." (CEDAW Article 12)

a) right to use contraceptives
b) right to have an abortion-on-demand
c) right to have as many children or as few as the mother wants.
d) all of the above

If you have picked "d" then good for you! By "reproductive rights" CEDAW means "ABORTION RIGHTS". Even pro-Choice organizations in America, where abortion is legal, never refer to "abortion" rights (or rarely do). Rather, they call "abortion rights" by the less-offensive term of "reproductive rights".

How do I know that CEDAW wants to make abortion-on-demand legal in every country where it is ratified?

Because the Review Committee (called the "Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women"--also known as the "Committee of Experts" and the "Oversight Committee") has told countries that have ratified the CEDAW treaty that they are in violation of the treaty as long as they have any laws restricting the free access to unlimited abortion services (the "MEANS" referred to in Article 16e of CEDAW)!

I am NOT lying to you!

Did you know that the Working Group for the Ratification of CEDAW and the U.S. Baha'i Office for External Affairs is the same office? The U.S. Baha'i Office for External Affairs is run by Kit Cosby. The number of the office is 202-833-8990. That is also the number one would call to get a free "CEDAW Kit" mailed to them.

A pro-Choice/pro-CEDAW Feminist website wrote:

"Activists can urge their state and local governments to join these trailblazers. Information on how to implement CEDAW in your community can be found by contacting Kit Cosby at the Working Group on the Ratification of CEDAW, 202-833-8990." (Feminists Take CEDAW Into Our Own Hands, p.1 online)

US Women Connect want free and open access to all forms of abortion at any time during pregnancy open to all women (no matter how young) on demand!

What is the head of the Baha'i Office of External Affairs doing as a Board Member (at one time the treasurer) a pro-Choice political organization?

*Kit Cosby has gone on speaking engagements with Francis Kissling; founder of Catholics-For-A-Free-Choice; the #1 pro-Choice Catholic political organization.

Kit Cosby is on the Board of a pro-Choice political organization, speaks and travels with the founder of a Catholic pro-Choice political organization, uses the Office of External Affairs as the "Working Group" for CEDAW in this country; to send out "kits" on how to become politically active for CEDAW.

Is this right?

The U.S. Baha'i Website encourages Baha'is to contact their representatives to insist they have the U.S. ratify CEDAW (which it has yet to do). The website says that CEDAW is "neutral on the subject of abortion". Is that true?

NO!

Read from Max Padilla, the Minister of Family for Niquaragua:

"It [CEDAW] condemns prostitution, but the convention's review committee directed China to legalize it. Even though the convention never mentions abortion, the convention's review committee repeatedly tells Catholic countries [that have ratified the treaty] they must legalize it." (FOX News, Tuesday, April 16, 2002, p.1 online)

"In its June 1999 meeting with the delegation of Nepal, CEDAW [i.e. the review committee] expressed its grave concern with Nepal's abortion law and noted that Nepal IS IN VIOLATION of Article 12 of the Women's Convention, which implies that refusing to provide REPRODUCTIVE HEALTH SERVICES to women discriminates against women on the basis of sex. In addressing the ABORTION issue, one CEDAW expert [i.e. review committee member] explained that a state party [i.e. a country that has ratified the treaty] to the Women's Convention discriminates against women when it refuses to provide REPRODUCTIVE SERVICES exlusive to women." (Human Rights Brief, Vol. 7, Issue 3, p.4 online, EMPHASIS ADDED)

I KID you not?

How can CEDAW get away with this? Easy! They know:

*Anything they tell countries or anyone else (i.e. "is it abortion neutral") has no legal standing because the CEDAW legal documents do NOT SAY THIS! CEDAW advocates can say anything to anyone anywhere and it has no legal standing. Only the Treaty itself does, which says that "reproductive rights" (information and the MEANS) must be available to women.

*Once a country ratifies CEDAW it's authors KNOW that the only thing that must occur is for a majority of high judges to "interpret" the treaty to mean that aboriton MUST be legal in all circumstances! They know that in many Catholic or Buddhist countries where abortion is illegal MOST lawyers and judges are more liberal than the general population, and that eventually the "legality" of anti-abortion laws will be overturned thanks to the international treaty.

American lawmakers KNOW all this. They know that CEDAW is a thinly-veiled ploy by Planned Parenthood International (MOST of the Review Committee members are also members of PPI) to get anti-abortion laws overturned! A ratification of CEDAW in the U.S. (where abortion in almost all cases is legal) would mean:

*An anti-partial birth abortion law would be "illegal" under CEDAW.

*Abortion in the Third Trimester (up to the very MOMENT of birth) would be legal in ALL circumstances.

That is what they are working for. And, by the way, YOU are working for that too; because your Baha'i Funds are going to Kit Cosby to help support her drive (out of her Baha'i Office) to get CEDAW ratified in the U.S.

You need to understand this:

*I am NOT a covenant-breaker, a "secret agent" etc. (yet I am shunned!)

*There are "Baha'is" in the Faith in this country who are secretly working to OVERTURN the Holy Laws and work for gay/lesbian Baha'i marriages, promotion of abortion-on-demand in the Faith, radical Feminism, sexual "freedom", etc. They don't come out OPENLY for this, but they are working "behind the scenes"; through whispers. They will try to DISCREDIT ANYONE whom they think is there enemy.

I am their enemy.

Do I mean the entire NSAUSA? NO! I mean certain individuals, and a few of these individuals are in high places. They "whisper" to ABMs who--thinking they are doing the Faith and God a service--believe the 'whispers' and make sure local LSAs believe them!

But they are lies.

CEDAW is diametrically opposed the Holy Law of God as revealed by The Bab, that was NOT abrogated by Baha'u'llah, and what Shoghi Effendi emphasized. Yet, if YOU would try to give a Deepening in your Community and simply reveal what The Bab and Shoghi Effendi had to say about abortion (and if certain parties found out) you would be told, "Cease and desist". Don't believe me? Try it.

You would be told, "Discussing abortion is getting the Faith involved in partisan politics!" (a LIE). You would be told, "Discussing abortion would be divisive in ythe Community! (only IF pro-Choice "Baha'is" would MAKE it devisive).

Try it. Hope a Deepening on "What The Bab and Shoghi Effendi said about abortion" and see what happens!

I am NOT your enemy! Your enemy are those "Baha'is" who wish to ignore the Law of God, and use lies and threats to silence anyone who merely informs other Baha'is on what the Holy Law is regarding abortion.

Darrick is Prevented from Re-entering the Faith

AFter I was told (by many Baha'is) that abortion was the "choice of the woman" I eventually found I was being led astray. Over the Internet I met other Baha'is who felt as I did (and others who did not). I knew that just because the Faith had hypocrites, didn't mean all was lost. I gained many Baha'i friends who felt exactly as I did. Eventually, in 1998, I decided to redeclare. I was eventually contacted by an Auxiliary Board Member from New Mexico who was visiting Seattle. We spoke for about 90 minutes. He asked me, "If you were discover something in the Faith that you disagreed with, would you resign from it again?" I told him that while I wouldn't be so impulsive next time, I could not say whether I would or would not ever resign again. Several months later I received a letter from Dr. Robert C. Henderson, which said that on the basis that I may "resign again", I would not be allowed to redeclare myself a Baha'i. He also accused me "picking and choosing" things in the Faith to believe and which not to believe (i.e. being a hypocrite).

I also discovered, that during this time a director of one of the Offices at the National Baha'i Center was circulating a letter which said that "Darrick Evenson may be trying to reenter the Faith in order to write an expose against it!" The paranoia among some Baha'is in regards to me was reaching "Scientological" proportions! I later called the person who authored the letter, and he refused to tell me why he had sent it. I knew that if this was wasn't backbiting, then nothing was!

Darrick Withdraws Second Request For Reinstatement

After awhile I submitted a second request for reinstatement, but I soon withdrew it. I felt at that time that so much "smoke" had been thrown up, that my efforts would agree prove futile. I realized then that my letters to Dr. Henderson had a profound effect upon him, and I believed at that time that while he was Secretary-General of the NSA, I would have no hope of reentering the Faith. Finally realizing this, and seeing that the false rumors about my motives were becoming more widespread, I "gave-up" trying to get reinstated, and decided to withdraw my new request. Perhaps I prejudged Dr. Henderson and the American NSA. I don't know. But that is how I felt at the time.

Conclusion

I don't know if I'll ever become a Baha'i again, or be allowed to. I don't even plan to try to get reinstated (redeclare) until the year 2009. To even try before that would be utterly fruitless. I sincerely believe I won't be allowed to enroll while Robert C. Henderson is Secretary-General. I offended him terribly. While I apologize for my offense to him, I still believe that he (and the NSA USA) is mistaken in their belief that merely "informing" other Baha'is as to what the Guardian and The Bab had to say about abortion is VIOLATING the Holy Laws by "getting involved into partisan politics".

How in the world is merely informing Baha'is (of what The Bab and Shoghi Effendi had to say about abortion) "getting the Faith involved into partisan politics"? That is what they told me--with a straight face.

I'm not kidding!

There are pro-Choice "Baha'is" which have sought through innuendo, whisperings, false rumors, strategem, and outright LIES to discredit me among the Baha'is. And they have succeeded! They have WON! Instead of trying to quite such gossip and backbiting, it appears that certain Auxiliary Board Members for Protection and their Assistants, thinking they are doing God and the Faith a great service, have perpetuated and encouraged such things! They do so under the "color" of their authority; in the name of "protecting" the Faith! Protecting it from WHOM? Me!?! How in the WORLD am I trying to damage the Faith?

Of course, the TRUTH is that a small number of Pro-Choice "Baha'is" are spreading false rumors in the hopes of "discrediting" me in the eyes of Baha'is. They hope this will silence me; shut me down so Baha'is simply won't be informed on what The Bab's Holy Law was about abortion, and what the Guardian had to say about it. And...it has worked beautifully! I can't go to a Community without the false rumors catching up, and the Baha'is shunning me. I have NEVER been declared a "covenant-breaker", but the Baha'is nevertheless shun me as soon as the false rumors come in. And they always do.

I have no choice but to remove myself from fellowship (even as a Seeker) with Baha'is. Once the "whispers" come they shun me, and believe whatever they are told about me. Denying the false rumors seems to do little good. How can I be believed when people they trust and know share with them whispers? How in the "world" can I return to the Baha'i Faith when I am being "shunned" and false rumors is being spread about me?

I am convinced that this will continue as long as certain individuals are in great positions of authority in the Faith in America. But I do not wish to discredit such people. I don't wish to bring contention to any Community. So, I must withdraw myself from fellowshipping with Baha'is. I have no other option!

The NSAUSA is supporting the implementation of the CEDAW treaty; which seeks to make "abortion-on-demand" the law of the land in every country that ratifies the treaty. I personally believe that the NSAUSA's promotion of CEDAW (a pro-CHOICE and partisan movement to make abortion-on-demand legal internationally) is getting the Faith involved in a partisan political issue; one which the Guardian specifically said Baha'is should "deprecate" (speak-out forcefully and openly AGAINST). The Guaridan wrote that Baha'is should be OUTSPOKEN in their opposition of abortion; NOT become politically-involved, not in demonstrations or bombings, but they should "deprecate" abortion. Is this being done? No. On the contrary, a pro-Choice treaty is being promoted by the Baha'i Office of External Affairs; with the blessing and support of the NSAUSA. The U.S. Baha'i Website is encouraging Baha'is to call their representatives to ratify CEDAW; which is NOT "abortion neutral" in any way, shape, or form.

I think and believe that the Baha'i Office of External Affiars such not be used as an office to support the implementation of CEDAW. By that is just my opinion. I believe that the Universal House of Justice is "under the shadow" of Baha'u'llah, and cannot be criticized. But I don't believe the NSAUSA is "infallible" in their actions, and I believe Baha'is should be able to use "constructive criticism" in regards to the NSA without fear of being "discredited" and having an underground campaign of false rumor against them. I'm NOT saying the NSAUSA has implemented such a campaign; they have not. But I do know that certain individuals in the Faith in this country, a few of them in positions of authority, have contributed to such a campaign.

I cannot even be a "Seeker" in a Baha'i Community without eventually being "shunned"; NOT for anything I have done in that Community, but because of the "whispers". Therefore, I cannot fellowship with Baha'is. Not my choice. I will continue to promote the Faith via the Internet. Why? Because I believe it is true. But I don't call myself a "Baha'i". I think that term should be restricted to those active in Baha'i Communities.

Please remember, there are some "Baha'is" (some of them in high offices) who outwardly say, "Oh yes, Baha'u'llah was a Manifestation of God and His Holy Law is the Will of God!" but in whispers they say, "Well, of course, Baha'u'llah was WRONG about homosexuality. Shoghi Effendi was of course MISTAKEN about homosexuality, and about abortion! They were just children of their times. We are MUCH wiser now! We will create a New World Order based upon Baha'i principles that are enlightened, but we shall ignore those laws which are archaic and not in accordance with the modern world!"

Really! They won't whisper that to YOU (if you are a true Believer). They whisper this among themselves. You don't need to fear the "Juan Coles" and others who openly wish to overthrow and reinterpret and water-down the Laws of Baha'u'llah. They are OPEN and honest about this. You need to fear those who are OUTWARDLY faithful Baha'is, and act like quiet sheep, but INWARDLY they are ravening wolves who seek to overthrow the Laws of Baha'u'llah and build a "New World Order" NOT in accordance to His Word, or the Will of God as revealed by Baha'u'llah, but in accordance to radicals, Feminists, New Agers, gay militants, and other Western Humanist philosophers; sinful little men and women whose minds are far from the Mind of God.

They are your enemy. Not me.

But they will lie to you, and spread lies, and try to convince you otherwise. And they have just about succeeded!

Will I ever become a Baha'i again? I don't know. I may not be allowed to; certainly not while some pro-Choice "Baha'is" are in certain positions of high authority in this country. I may try again in 2009, but certainly NOT before that. Even then I may not be allowed back in.

I am a firm believer of Jesus Christ as "the very Savior of man", in Joseph Smith as an inspired Seer who prophecied (in his capacity as a SEER) of Baha'u'llah, and in Baha'u'llah as the Spirit of Truth!

Darrick Evenson
June 2003

Darrick T. Evenson

"Keep the tongue from evil, and the lips from speaking guile." (Psalm 34:13)

"A gossip goes around spreading rumors, while a trustworthy man tries to quiet them." (Proverbs 11:12 The Living Bible translation)

"A hypocrite with his mouth destroyeth his neighbor; but through knowledge shall the just be delivered." (Proverbs 11:9)