JAH - Homosexuality - View Messages

GA: This is what im saying. Its a complete cultural perversion. This is the insidious invasion of the HOME that i mentioned prior.

If your "home" produces a gay child that is not an invasion. Was Lila Ike born in that home? Yes or no? There is no gay farm in Idaho where gay people are grown and then dropped off with an agenda to take over different industries.

What makes an Agent an Agent is that their intention is to influence a foreign group of people with foreign propaganda based on what's best for the Agent and his/her people without any regard to the group they have infiltrated. I understand why you want to see Lila Ike as an outsider. But is she? Or is she just like everyone else to the extent that we are all the same? The problem is we all look for differences to be the basis of exclusion.

GA: By that measure, if gays are allowed to attack people financially and commercially based on their hetero views then ones should freely be able to verbally chant for their obliteration and destruction in i humble opinion.

Let's test this logic... I'm just going to change a few words. My intent isn't to twist what you're saying, but rather insert a different message into the same context.

By that measure, if [black people] are allowed to attack [white racists] financially and commercially based on their [racist] views then ones should freely be able to verbally [call] for their (black people's) obliteration and destruction in i humble opinion.

I don't think the logic quite works when said group is responding to oppression.

Messenger: GARVEYS AFRICA

Sent: 6/3/2022 5:15:17 AM

Ninja: ".....I'm arguing from a standpoint of nature."

And there is our disconnect
I am arguing from a standpoint of culture.

I think a earlier brother summarized the part re: nature well when he said it is not JUST observations of nature through how InI Rastafari manifest livity. I think you also make this point, especially to counter the Rases who use ONLY the 'nature' argument in response to homosexuality.

ChantDownBabylon: "Homosexual behaviors are not uncommon for animals. And this is one of the reasons why the "natural law" fails to be the ground of human morality.... "

Yes.

I and I observe also outside of natural law and biblical law, a code of morality and precepts as guided (mongst, to, from) I and I, Haile Selassie I Almighty in flesh

Messenger: Arma Gideon

Sent: 6/4/2022 12:09:30 AM

Haile I Garvey Africa

InI salute de I for defending the "order" the Father has set before
mankind. InI have noticed its from 2015 the I has been holding the foundation against "new age" thinking and worst of all ..... rationalization of that which has no place in the trod.

again , Salute to you Fari
No retreat, No surrender
Haile I 4InI

Messenger: GARVEYS AFRICA

Sent: 6/4/2022 12:50:46 AM

Give thanks onto H.I.M. New fruit cant alter root. The foundation done set already it is up to I and I to perform the necessary preservatory works. Defender of the faith and protector of the covenant, His Majesty exemplify and show wi already. Arma dread natty Gideon, I see the I a long time member same way, and some did think we would give up and bow out from when, as the works often often mean going against the grain. Full Manners and Respect, Blessed love

Messenger: RasTafarIWork

Sent: 6/4/2022 3:19:22 PM

IPXninja, the compliment of the penis is the vagina, nothing else. That's the Yin & Yan.
Do you really think it would be otherwise?

Creation doesn't CHOOSE the sexual role to play, it is created. Sexuality and asexuality is NOT a choice by design. And again even in the asexual creatures, don't we see their fruit?

Human kind is the only creature that is empowered with choice, unfortunately some choose corruption. What is the fruit of corruption? Isn't it death? I choose life and continuity.

Messenger: RasTafarIWork

Sent: 6/4/2022 3:53:44 PM

Then you said,

"It is the IMBALANCE of these hormones (estrogen/testosterone) that defines the GENDER of the PHYSICAL BODY."

So let's blame the hormones, maybe intervene?
Maybe the chromosomes, let's manipulate that too. After all, we can CHOOSE to ALTERNATE, right?

Apart from the physical how about the spiritual and psycho aspects of the human being, do they have anything to do with GENDER, and why not influence these to the orientation of our liking?

I ask these coz the LGBT mostly use science to establish their narrative. But 1 thing they forget is CREATION CANNOT MOVE AHEAD OF THE CREATOR!

Messenger: Black Christ Salvation

Sent: 6/5/2022 3:16:39 AM

Messenger: RasTafarIWork

Sent: 6/5/2022 7:14:44 AM

RasTafarI Idren, represent Our Source, HIM Emperor Haile Selassie I and HH Empress Menen.
Everytime.

Messenger: IPXninja

Sent: 6/6/2022 11:44:52 AM

GA: And there is our disconnect
I am arguing from a standpoint of culture.

That's fair. You're saying the dominant culture in Rasta is the biblical culture-from which homosexuality is an abomination. We agree on that.

From this standpoint of common ground let's look at a different but similar scenario. Abortion. This is not exactly the same because the correct interpretation/understanding of the bible actually enforces abortion in order to save the life of the mother. However, the culture of white evangelical Christians has evolved in such a way that abortion, period, is an abomination to them. And they clearly want to use their culture to dictate what others should be able to do with their bodies when it comes to this issue.

People who have abortions aren't seeking it's acceptance by Evangelical Christians nor are they calling it an Evangelical Christian thing. It is fully within the perrogative of the Evangelical community to hate abortion with as much passion as they would like. That's their culture and their problem. That's their choice to evolve or not evolve. But they can also simply choose NOT to personally have abortions without denying the right of others, who are not evangelical christians, to do the same. And maybe there are evangelical christians who do use the abortion opion when available. That's their choice. They are fully aware it isn't culturally accepted. Maybe it will be in the future. Maybe it wont. But they're not going to change the culture with their one personal decision. But they're not making a personal decision that is reflective or on the behalf of their culture. It is a personal choice.

(well maybe its not quite so different after all)

Even though it's not exactly the same I think some of the same thought applies here. I could even argue that the bible is only against gay men and not lesbians. But you could argue that it doesn't matter because the inclusion of lesbians is a cultural thing, not a biblical thing. So in a manner of speaking, on the issue of culture, you really cannot be wrong.

But can culture be wrong? You haven't argued that culture is perfect and cannot be wrong and I respect that. Because I think you already know that wouldn't be a winning argument. And so I cannot argue that culture can be wrong because that isn't the argument you're making. That would be a bit of a straw man. That being said, it should be obvious that culture is defined by and works for the benefit of the majority.

Messenger: IPXninja

Sent: 6/6/2022 11:49:32 AM

The US and other nations are changing in their cultures because, even though LGBTQ is a minority, it exists in the MAJORITY of families. Opinions on racism are somewhat progressing because there are more black people in white families and those families have to come face to face with nieces, nephews, and grandchildren who are black.

But the question is:

Is it unfair for black people to fall in love with whites because it may be an affront to that segment of white culture that is racist? Should interracial couples choose not to exist because it is against the culture that one or both were born into?

Are interracial couples each part of some kind of invasion where they are agents advancing an agenda to change white culture through the knowledge of the existence of their relationship? And when we see light-skinned people, who have genes from both races, are they, in fact, agents? Should they not be allowed to exist publicly? Should they keep their existence in some sort of private cone of shame?

...or a closet

You may already see where this is heading. Just by his very existence, just by his skin tone, Bob Marley was a rebel to the white culture. And it was "somewhat" his own culture because his father was white. But whites did not accept any kind of blackness in their culture and so they had the "one-drop rule" where Bob would automatically be considered black. I personally know white people who are into reggae music and seen so many more. And obviously, the value of Bob's impact on white people is so much more than the statement made by his own skin color and personal heritage. It is his message, not "what" he personally was in terms of white or black.

And so, in spite of your excellent arguments on behalf of culture... No. BECAUSE of... your excellent arguments in defending the culture... there is a part of me that wonders, "what if Bob was gay?" Or... (less offensively) "what if someone like Lila Ike was the next Bob Marley?". Is Lila Ike saying "my lesbian preference should change rastafari forever"? Is she saying that? Or does she simply want to exist and make the kind of music that she loves?

71 - 80

Return to Reasoning List