A List of slanders

The first item here is a compilation from an email posting and my response to it, summarising some slanders abut me. It is strictly of historical interest. The page is here because I need a permanent place to put new quotes and URLs of additional items that come to my attention. Since I have not until now had a system for collecting these, what follows is far from complete.

=====

MM to TK, 9 March 2010:
“… if we ignore the authoritative interpretations which exclude women
from the House of Justice what is to prevent us from ignoring the
authoritative interpretations which insist on monogamy as well?
Sen, here would even like to see us do that!”

KK: LOL. Would he really? Or are you teasing Sonja.

My response to KK, 10 March 2010, on the TK list:

I do tease Sonja; she’s from a large family and has several unmarried
sisters. If one Sonja is good, two Sonjas must be better, no? Besides,
Sonjas come in such small sizes, it would be easy to find room for
another :-)

But seriously, the topos of “Sen McGlinn promotes bigamy” actually is
circulated, see for example Susan Maneck to Bahai Studies, 2 January
2008; idem to CARM forum 26 March 2009.

There are a number of other stories like this that are circulated;
that I challenged the House of Justice, I stole Bahai manuscripts, set
“himself up as a person with authority” (Maneck to Bahai Studies 15
July 2007), “categorically excludes letters written on the Guardian’s
behalf as valid sources” (MM to TK, 22 Oct 2007); promotes
“the idea that there should be a clerical class within the Baha’i
community” (Maneck to Bahai Studies Jan 2008); “claiming the authority
as a specialist” “to promote positions in opposition to the Universal
House of Justice” (Maneck to Bahai_Discuss, 5 Jan 2006, similar on 4
Jan 2006); advocating a “”new organ” of academics” to “be appointed
and make its pronouncements independent of the House of Justice”
(Poirier to Bahai-Discuss 19 Dec 2005); saying that the rulings of the
UHJ should be “subject to challenge by a consensus of the ‘ulama who
could issue an ‘official opinion’ as theologians” (Maneck, cited in
the previous), wanting to put scholars “in a position where they could
*challenge* the House of Justice by claiming that the House’s decision
was contrary to the spirit of the Teachings” (Maneck to bahai-discuss
18 Dec 2005); advocating a “Mashriq would be dominated by some
clerical class” (Maneck to bahai-discuss 16 Dec 2005); “attempt to
the undermine the authority of the House” (Maneck to Bahai-discuss 1
Dec 2005).

I don’t respond to these claims unless there is an indication that
someone else is taking them seriously, or what is said has the
(usually unintended) implication that the UHJ has been less than
honest about its reasons. Especially on a list such as [TK], I
assume the members will be astute enough to realise what is going on

Sen

Later entries:

“deliberately defying the Universal House of Justice.”
Maneck to tonews/Bahai list, July 8, 2010
http://www.tonews.com/thread/1457599/talk/religion/bahai/review_of_sens_article_on_theocracy.html

Short link: http://wp.me/PcgF5-1CC