Baha’is also embrace alcohol, pork, gambling and adultery.

Human rights activists are studying this new wave of hate for one reason — the Islamic Republic of Iran runs Kayhan. Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei picks the managing editor. So there’s more to these headlines than ink and paper.

“When Iran has a new enemy, it never takes long for them to connect that enemy to us,” said Kit Bigelow, external affairs director for the Baha’i faith in the United States. “It used to be Russian and Britain, then it was Israel and the Zionists. Now, it’s the United States. … We can see certain dots being connected right now in Iran, even though we can’t say for sure that we can see cause and effect. It’s foreboding.”

Here are some of the dots the experts are connecting.

Iranian officials recently arrested 54 Baha’is and their supporters involved in a UNICEF community service project in Shiraz, even though the young people obtained a permission letter for their project from the local Islamic Council. Last week, 51 of them were released on bail, although they have not been formally charged with a crime.

The three young people still in jail “were not the leaders, in any sense of the word” and no one knows why they have been singled out, said Bigelow. Other arrests during the past year have followed this pattern — mysterious arrests, demands for bail and no formal charges. Meanwhile, Iranian police also raided six Baha’i homes and collected computers, books, notebooks and other documents.

“We think this is part of a strategy to keep the Baha’i community off balance, to keep us on tenterhooks,” said Bigelow.

But nothing alarmed Baha’is more than the disclosure this spring of a confidential 2005 letter sent to the Iranian Ministry of Information, the Revolutionary Guard and police. It said the “Supreme Leader, Ayatollah Khamenei, had instructed the Command headquarters to identify persons who adhere to the Baha’i faith and monitor their activities,” according to a statement by Asma Jahangir of Pakistan, Special Rapporteur on religious liberty for the United Nations. The letter asked the “recipients to, in a highly confidential manner, collect any and all information about members of the Baha’i faith.”

Anti-Defamation League director Abraham Foxman connected the dots and detected what he believes is a horrifying pattern.

“These actions … are reminiscent of the steps taken against Jews in Europe and a dangerous step toward the institution of Nuremberg-type laws,” said Foxman, a Holocaust survivor. “This clear attempt to step-up persecution of the Baha’i community in Iran sets a dangerous precedent” and has raised the historic persecution of Iran’s largest religious minority “to the next level.”

These strong words may provide little comfort, since Iranian leaders already claim the Baha’is are agents for Zionism.

Part of the problem is that the Baha’i faith, which proclaims the unity of all religions, also has unique ties to Islam and Iran. The faith began with a leader known as the Bab, who claimed a direct lineage from Muhammad. He predicted the coming of a new prophet, but was executed in 1850 in Tabriz.

Baha’is believe this new prophet — the successor to Abraham, Moses, Jesus, Muhammad and others — was Baha’ullah, who was born in 1817 in Tehran. He was persecuted and repeatedly banished to Baghdad, Constantinople and, finally, Palestine. He died in 1892 and his tomb, and the Bab’s tomb, is in a shrine near the Baha’i headquarters in Haifa.

Thus, Iran insists that Baha’i believers are both apostates and heretics, Thus, the faith is a sect that does not deserve the recognition and rights that the Islamic republic grants to Jews, Christians and Zoroastrians.

“They believe that the Baha’i faith is not a valid, independent world religion in its own right,” said Bigelow, who is a convert from Christianity. “And, of course, our holy shrine is located in what has become the modern state of Israel. So when Baha’is around the world, including thousands of Baha’is in Iran, send money to help support this shrine and our work they are sending money to Israel. You can imagine what the current leaders of Iran think of that.”

   Send article as PDF to

The hall was full of unfamiliar students wanting to become members. Most were carrying Bibles with markers in the first chapter of St. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans. They also had copies of the campus policy forbidding discrimination on the basis of “race, religion, color, national origin, ancestry, age, sex, sexual orientation, disability, marital or veteran status.”

Truth is, this scene hasn’t happened at Rutgers or anywhere else — so far.

What if it did?

What if conservative Christians tried to rush a gay-rights group and elect new leaders? What if, when told they couldn’t join because they rejected its core beliefs, evangelicals cited cases in which Christian groups were punished for refusing leadership roles to homosexuals? What if, when jeered by angry homosexuals, evangelicals called this verbal violence rooted in religious bigotry and, thus, harassment?

“No, no, no. I have never heard of a case in which conservative Catholics, Protestants or Jews tried to turn the tables in this fashion,” said historian Alan Charles Kors, president of the Philadelphia-based Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE)

“That would never happen. There is an inherent meekness … among students of faith on all these campuses. It’s so ironic that people call them intolerant and offensive. Most of these religious students are among the last people who would ever go where they are not wanted. All they want is to be free to express their beliefs.”

But there have been a growing number of cases in which traditional religious groups have been attacked because their “intolerant” beliefs and policies offend modern academia. Almost all of these cases are collisions between ancient moral doctrines and campus policies that defend and promote the Sexual Revolution.

The bottom line, according to recent FIRE legal guides, is that almost all campus policies that inhibit religious practices also inhibit the constitutional rights of free speech, association and assembly. Public colleges and universities are not supposed to make doctrinal decisions that deny privileges to some religious groups that are then extended to other secular or religious groups.

Yet that is what is happening.

“Religious liberty is now center stage in the battle for freedom on campus,” according to David French, a Harvard Law School graduate who wrote the manual covering disputes over faith issues. “Religious students are particularly convenient targets. After all, they think and behave in ways that many other students don’t understand; they tend to be small minorities on most campuses; and — by religious conviction — they often resist even the most heavy-handed repression.”

For all of their talk about “diversity” and “tolerance,” French is convinced many academic leaders think that “the fewer ‘fanatics’ — of the ‘wrong’ kind — the better.”

While these campus disputes are often described in terms of “left” and “right,” the FIRE project (www.thefireguides.org) has been endorsed by a diverse coalition of activists ranging from Edwin Meese III, attorney general in the Reagan administration, to American Civil Liberties Union President Nadine Strossen.

The key is that academic leaders must be honest, said French. Leaders at state schools are quickly learning that their work is covered by explicit laws that ban any “viewpoint discrimination” that blesses some believers and curses others. Religious schools, meanwhile, are allowed to require particular beliefs and practices — mandatory chapel, moral codes, doctrinal statements for faculty — if these rules are clearly stated in writing.

Right now, the toughest battles are at some of America’s most prestigious private colleges and universities. These secular schools once encouraged fierce debates and proudly tolerated dissent. But now, it seems that some worldviews are created more equal than others.

Many religious believers do not discover this reality until they arrive on campus and receive copies of the all-powerful student handbook.

“Students must be told the truth,” said French. “They should not be duped into believing that they have enrolled in a school that respects their beliefs and their freedom to express viewpoints that are out of the so-called mainstream. These secular schools must be more honest in their recruiting materials and catalogues. This is a truth in advertising issue.”

   Send article as PDF to