Use the drop-down boxes above to navigate through the Website  
Return to Reasoning List

Here is a link to this page:

Meat is Ital

1 - 1011 - 2021 - 3031 - 4041 - 5051 - 6061 - 7071 - 72
Time Zone: EST (New York, Toronto)
Messenger: Jahcub I Sent: 10/8/2022 10:43:52 AM

Messenger: Jahcub I Sent: 10/8/2022 10:47:20 AM

Good reasoning Idren!

I think NinJAH is playing devil's advocate, or possibly angel's advocate, trying to bring about a good reasoning.

Bless Up Cedric! Give thanks for the call to reason Iyah! As the I said, "Plant protein is the main source of protein, meat is the “alternative source”". Haha that is the truth right there. Babylon has people thinking backwards about that.

Just as Black heart said Ital means vegetarian life. And as Evison Matafale Skræling said, when we eat a orange and throw the seed another tree can grow.

That sums it up right there. No bones, no blood, in the kitchen. Ital is life giving not life taking. The plants are live food and the animal flesh is dead carcass. InI bodies are not a grave yard.

Animal flesh maybe a natural thing, but it is not natural for man to eat it. Man's anatomy and physiology proves this, showing man to be a frugivore. Man ate fruits and veggies long, long, long, time. Humans only began to eat meat in times of vegetation scarcity.

Ital is much more than something being natural. It is what was natural for the Original Man and Womban from the begining. The Original Order.

IPXninja said, "Yes, there are plant-based alternative sources of protein but they are not the most efficient sources for it."

Brotha a person can easily get the most efficient protein requirements from plant-based sources. All of the essential amino acids are readily available in plants. Along with all the protein a person could need, plants also provide fiber and anti-oxidants; animal protein does not provide these nutrients.

IPXnninja said, "...many vegans begin to lose muscle mass if they cannot keep up with their protein requirements."

Everyone will lose muscle mass if they cannot keep up with their protein requirements. Those vegans that you are referring to are not eating healthy. They often do not eat enough calories in general or they often are eating a bunch of vegan junk food. What they are not eating is whole foods plant-based, which Ital is.

IPXninja said, "And different people may have different protein requirements."

True, all of which can be met on a vegan whole foods plant-based diet.

IPXninja said, "I see no reason to pass judgment on an entire nutritious food group without a really good reason. And I haven't seen that reason yet."

Plenty of good reasons for the animals life and health, for the Earth's life and health, and for your own. Eating meat increases your risk of various heart disease and disorders, various forms of cancer, diabetes, pneumonia, osteoarthritis, colon polyps, diverticular disease, gastritis, duodenitis, gallbladder disease, impotence, dementia, enlarged prostate, female genital prolapse, uterine fibrosis, cataracts... Just to name a few lol! There are MANY more reasons one SHOULD use some serious judgment and pass on the dead animal carcass. InI RasTafarI bredren and sistren can fill this thread with the reasons!

Ital is Life
Life over Death
Ital is Vital

Messenger: jessep86 Sent: 10/8/2022 9:52:08 PM

Funny how the mainstream media and political left has hijacked veganism and taking care of the planet. Both often in name of climate change.

Rastafari taught about the environment, ital food long before it was fashionable just as cannabis has been hijacked and exploited. Few mentions of how Rastafari pioneered these rights. Without Rasta they cant do things right.

Messenger: Jahcub I Sent: 10/8/2022 11:50:56 PM

The FDA hijacked the term "organic" as well, creating the USDA Organic label. So I agree with IPXninja when he says that the label organic is often deceptive. It can be. And so there are labels with higher standards, like the "Oregon Tilth" label.

There are many organic farmers that still spray and dump tons of fertilizers and other chemicals, they just use organic versions. Even though these chemicals are organic, they are still not that great for all the organic organism that they come in contact with, including InI.

This is a major reason Iman have been studying permaculture methods to grow food. No chemical sprays or fertilizers. Just like InI ancestors grew food. InI use the highest natural organic ways. InI let nature do it's work and assist where InI can.

Messenger: IPXninja Sent: 10/11/2022 4:57:27 PM

Jahcub: Animal flesh maybe a natural thing, but it is not natural for man to eat it. Man's anatomy and physiology proves this, showing man to be a frugivore. Man ate fruits and veggies long, long, long, time. Humans only began to eat meat in times of vegetation scarcity.

I disagree. Human anatomy proves that we have adapted to eating... everything. However, there are changes that came from the "invention" of agriculture and cooking, just like dietary changes that came with the "invention" of better tools to hunt.

Again... I'm not attacking anyone or their version/understanding of what's "natural". Feel absolutely free to disagree and let's have an amazing conversation to highlight our differences so that more knowledge and information can be shared to shed light on the subject. Not about who is right or who is wrong.

So with that said, if someone wants to forage for their food who am I to stand in their way? After all, if your goal is to be and eat like the "ORIGINAL" man then you do not need any tools at all, just rocks and pieces of wood. That is simply not for me. I am a fan of evolution because evolution itself is NATURAL. And that is my position.

Since I could never reject evolution as a natural process, I could never reject the invention of tools, the invention of language, the invention of scientific research and testing, the development of agricultural science, and the understanding of cooking and killing potentially deadly bacteria. The "ORIGINAL" man didn't have or know any of this. In fact, if said "OG" man came across an unknown species of fruit, he might eat the fruit not knowing that it was poisonous. This knowledge comes from EXPERIENCE. Unfortunately, we had to witness a lot of death (HUMAN) before we could know what foods we could eat. And now because of the inclusion of medical science, we can understand more about how our bodies handle different types of food and human lifespan has gotten longer.

However, another point to consider, is that viruses also mutate and evolve; including those that affect plants. If you ignore modern science and medicine you may also ignore that viruses evolve and get stronger. And if you're not living in the region where "OG" humans first breathed life the chances are you couldn't eat the same foods they ate. Some of the foods they ate may have even vanished from extinction or evolved into something else either more beneficial or even harmful.

Example. Did roses start out with thorns, knowing they would need them? Or did they adapt and grow thorns as a reaction?

Jahcub: Brotha a person can easily get the most efficient protein requirements from plant-based sources. All of the essential amino acids are readily available in plants. Along with all the protein a person could need, plants also provide fiber and anti-oxidants; animal protein does not provide these nutrients.

You are correct. After all, these nutrients could not get into meat otherwise :)

But what I'm talking about is in the AMOUNT of plants you'd need to consume to equal the same amount of protein. Now, modern health will tell you that Broccoli (native to the mediterranean) contains more protein per calorie than steak and spinach (southwest Asia) is around the same as chick and fish.

ex: it takes 5 bananas to equal the calorie content of a hamburger

Of course, it all depends on whether you can get enough. My guess is that if all 7 billion people suddenly gave up all meat and switched to looking for the same plants only the rich would have these plants and the poor would get pigs feet yet again.

Jahcub: Everyone will lose muscle mass if they cannot keep up with their protein requirements. Those vegans that you are referring to are not eating healthy. They often do not eat enough calories in general or they often are eating a bunch of vegan junk food. What they are not eating is whole foods plant-based, which Ital is.

You are correct again, and sadly the only vegan role model I had as a child was a very thin man who I never wanted to physically resemble. I can't speak to the "vegan junk food" thing. He and his wife lived very similar to like an Amish family. But that's just a personal anacdote. I'm not judging. But that's why I am saying that one must get enough protein from plants to give their body what their bodies need.

As far as health risks, I grew up in the Seventh Day Adventist church. Those of you from Jamaica probably have a good idea of what that means. I grew up with vegetarians. My father was vegetarian before he died. Mother is now vegan. And so I have seen a fair amount of those elders die from different causes. The reality is backed up by my own observations. Vegans and vegetarians CAN live longer lives but it's often not because they don't eat meat. If you are a health-conscious meat eater you can outlive a vegan who doesn't exercise. So the stats are a little skewed because people who are vegans (especially converts) are more likely to be more health-conscious in general. But many of the elders I saw die, died at normal ages because they didn't have a similar faith in exercise. I hope to outlive my father because of this. Metabolism, for example, is a huge component. And metabolism has a lot to do with how much fuel your muscles use. Plus, it is also estimated that about 25% of the difference in our lifespan is pre-determined by genetics. So at the end of the day, I personally believe that you can eat meat and easily outlive many who don't. In fact, my own great-grandmother ate meat up until she was in her mid-90s. I think she mainly ate chicken though. I doubt she ate pork. I think she lived to be 101 if not mistaken.

Another big contributor to physical problems and shorter life is S-T-R-E-S-S. You can lose a couple of years off that alone. So the point is that there are many different factors and therefore, for me, since a big factor is quality of life, I personally, will take the -2 or -3 years from eating meat if that's what it ends up being. But at the same time, investing in cleaner air, cleaner water, a whole spa room dedicated to relieving stress, and lots of exercises to counteract my sedentary job. I think our jobs, more than most things, contribute to how we age, skin quality, etc.

Messenger: Cedric Sent: 10/12/2022 12:24:37 AM

Blessed Love Iahs

Bless Up Evison, I agree 1 Family of Rastafari and only love and Raspect with Inity in I sight, Give Thanks

Bless Up Jahcub I, I agree the most efficient protein comes from plant-based sources. I think science can prove that.

Bless Up IPXninja, Yes I, its not about who is right and who is wrong. Let InI embrace differences and live in Inity. I was trying to tease the I a little when I said the I was wrong, I forget that my sarcastic demeanor is not always funny and even worse can get lost in translation in digital communications. I have even been told in real life when I debate topics that it comes across as I’m-right-you’re-wrong attitude and that is not my intention. I just love debating and maybe need to tone down the passion and work on I delivery more.

Even though I fully Raspect what Jahcub I said, for I man it is less about what original people did. It is actually more about what I think humanity should evolve into, and what I think is the safest and healthiest way for humans to live in harmony with the earth. And I feel that it can be proven by science which is why I got excited that maybe IPXninja would get on board haha.

IPXninja, very good point that if the world gave up meat and all switched to looking for the same plants then only the rich would have plants again. Very true. The point I was trying to make is that currently, the way modern farming is, in a way it is already kind of like that because the majority of farmed meat is fed common food crops that humans could also eat. Very few meat sources are fed on only grazing. So in a large way, the meat industry is taking away viable plant-based proteins that humans could eat, putting it into a losing cycle by feeding it to an animal, and then harvesting that animal for meat. I read some excerpts from the book I suggested, to refresh I memory, and found out that the seven-times equation I referenced only pertained to animals that grazed AND had a grain fed diet. The purely plant-to-meat protein ratio of how much plant protein goes into an animal to get the same amount of protein from the meat is more like 21 times.

Now if one’s meat diet is strictly game or hunted meat and not farmed, that takes a lot of the argument away, because that animal was not fed grain or viable food crops to sustain itself, but let’s be honest, how many store bought meats are actually sourced in that manner?

I certainly do not have the best track record for eating healthy, and don’t want to come across like I only eat Ital. And Yes I as Evison said, I am a work in progress! I strive to eat healthier and support healthy community farms.

Yes I IPXninja, I also make choices based on I perceived quality of life over strictly health. I think that is ultimately healthier for InI in the long run, even if it might sound contradictory.

Empress Menen I & HIM Haile Selassie I Love

Messenger: Jahcub I Sent: 10/12/2022 2:00:50 AM

IPXninja said, "My guess is that if all 7 billion people suddenly gave up all meat and switched to looking for the same plants only the rich would have these plants and the poor would get pigs feet yet again."

We wouldn't all be looking for the same plants though. People can and do eat a vast variety of plants and different edible plants are found all around the world. Lol should I copy and post the lyrics from Macka B's Wha Me Eat? And though the bredren mentions so many plant foods InI can eat, there are thousands of edible plants he did not mention. How long a song that would be!

Even if we were looking to eat the same exact food, we can still grow so much more food than we do now. And if more people grew more of their own food, then there would be an abundant surplus of food to share. Most people when they garden have food to share.

Most the grain grown on planet is fed to livestock. Around 65% of it. And livestock is mostly raised to feed people. So if people weren't eating livestock then that would free up a lot of grain for the people. It could also free up space to grow other things besides grains. There's also the extra land that livestock themselves are raised on. Less land being used to hold and raise livestock, means more land to grow food.

Haile Blessed
Most I

Messenger: IPXninja Sent: 10/12/2022 10:27:02 AM

My apologies. I'm just now seeing the responses from the previous page. I'm glad this is becoming a lively discussion.

@Black heart

Bro IPXninja. d rasta term ital means vegetarian life so d I can't claim ital while eating meat. When u say meat is ital its d same as saying meat is vegetarian. Not all proteins are ital. Lentils is ital proteins but meat is non ital protein. Oneness

I respectfully disagree. It means vegetarian to you and many others. For someone else, by the self-same logic, it would mean vegan. I have a natural love for all rastas and all rasta viewpoints. It is because of this love that I also enjoy challenging views. When done in a spirit of love I believe this makes it stronger. So if you can respectfully rip my arguments to shreds then I say, with great love and respect, I invite you to do exactly that!

see the section on Vegetarianism.

The reason I can push back, challenging the mainstream narrative, is because no narrative should go unchallenged or untested. If it survives the test, no problem. Right? But if it doesn't then we're holding on to something because it was handed down, not because it is true. And that can be problematic. But once an individual encounters such a conflict that individual is then free to make individual choices, not necessarily go to war with the entire religion.

So with that said, Cedric is correct about the phrase "Ital is Vital". Ital is really just Vital without English V being pronounced which is common in the dialect. So, that being the case, who decides what's "vital"?

Black heart: "D main objective fo ital livity is to avoid killing of animals fo food, thus only plants are eaten. Ital livity/vegetarian life is a livication to Jah. Jah see n know."

Is it though? I feel like someone else might have a different opinion about the "main objective". And if you believe Jah created the plants as living organisms you must also believe he created animals as living organisms. If you believe this then you must accept that Jah designed many animals to eat other animals. One of my cats is allergic to grains. To indiscriminately assume that one thing is good for everyone ignores things like evolution and how the organs of different organisms have evolved to process different sources of food. Consider how the neck of a giraffe is iconic but only for the fact that it lengthened in order to reach food from trees. Because of this, it can feed from sources of food that other animals cannot. And this helped the species to survive. So evolution, which is natural, does take into account the availability of food. Our evolution, therefore, also takes this into account. So should the giraffe stop eating from trees and forage for food on the ground only? I don't think so. I think the giraffe is programmed to survive and trees are equally as natural as the giraffe who eats from the trees.

As far as Jah "seeing n knowing"... the same book that says "to you it shall be for meat" already, at the time of that writing, understood "meat" to be food. The very word for food was "meat" which comes from animals. The Israelites were not gardeners primarily. The story of Cain and Abel was a story of 2 contrasting lifestyles of survival. Cain represented the farmer and he offered Jah the best of his crops as a sacrifice. Abel offered the best of his cattle. Which one was accepted? Jah even remarked at the smell of cooked meat. This is biblical. And the truth is that you could not be an Israelite without eating meat because eating the Passover lamb was a requirement of the law. So just as you would keep Shabbat on the seventh day, if you were holding true to Israelite traditions, according to the Torah, you must also partake in the feast days and the Passover, arguably, is the primary one.

Messenger: IPXninja Sent: 10/12/2022 10:49:56 AM


My heart is filled with joy to see your words. I can always feel your heart and positive energy.

Cedric: I had to laugh when the I calls plant based protein “alternative sources”. Plant protein is the main source of protein, meat is the “alternative source”.

What I meant by this is that if person A has a primarily meat-based diet then meat is their primary source. If person B is vegetarian then meat is an alternative source (eggs for example, are meat). Many vegetarians also occasionally eat fish. If a person is a vegan then their only source of protein is plant-based. So what is "main" and "alternative" are subjective to the lifestyles (and survival methods) of different organisms.

Cedric: It takes 7 times the amount of (plant based) nutrients to go into an animal, to equal the amount of nutrients one would get from killing and eating that animal.

This is true and that's why no one should eat meat by itself. That would be... silly and unhealthy. Seeking balance, I find it "less efficient" to consume 4-5 the number of biomass in order to get my protein purely from plants. And then what happens to the animal populations we normally eat? Will they not consume the plants? Wouldn't some species of animals reproduce out of control if they weren't hunted by predators? My point is that the ecosystem is complex and has evolved in ways that are built on the foundation of predators vs prey.

note: this doesn't mean I support factory farming or how animals are currently treated in food production.

Cedric: Has the I ever read the book, “Diet for a Small Planet”?

Nope. Is there a PDF available?

Cedric: but it seems the I is alluding to that is not the case and companies can just misrepresent food as organic just to charge more? I know there are many loopholes in the words that advertisers are allowed to use, especially when it comes to words like “natural” and “flavoring”, but it sounds like the I is trying to discredit the science behind the process of labeling a food as “organic”.

When it comes to capitalism people will always find and exploit those loopholes. It doesn't mean they all are but it means if you truly want to know if the "organic" label is true you have to do more homework.

Cedric: At the very least, meat eaters need to be honest that by eating meat, one is making a choice based on taste or preference over nutrition and what is the most efficient way to feed an entire planet.

You are absolutely right on this point. Like I said, I grew up vegetarian. I believe in balance.

Messenger: IPXninja Sent: 10/12/2022 11:07:35 AM


seestem: I don't know about the science but I do know that most people won't be able to slaughter an animal. You could argue that its because of conditioning or that we forgot but I counter that with saying most people can harvest plants very easily.

I understand the point you're trying to make and would really like to agree with it in its entirety. But I think you are considering an ideal situation where each person on the planet could have enough land to farm. The way that land is owned, in some areas would be just as easy as slaughtering animals whereas in other areas, like cities, a person may own no land at all or be under regulations for how the land they do own is used. For example, I'm pretty sure I wouldn't be allowed to use my entire front lawn as a garden. And the back of my house has a creek and is shrouded in tall trees. I love it but I'm only left with a semi-large raised bed that doesn't get a whole lot of direct sunlight. I couldn't even think of being able to produce enough food to feed even one person.

The point I'm trying to make is that all these differences and different lifestyles are much easier depending on the environment you live in. And therefore all organisms adapt and evolve accordingly.

seestem: Cutting the head of a chicken is a very uncomfortable experience for most people

Oh, I get it. I really do. It's a fair point. But I would also imagine that a lot of people would find it uncomfortable farming without modern tools. My ancestors didn't really have a choice, but to become the farming tools of the plantation owners. Discomfort was passed onto them. Genesis 3:19 (the first occurrence of the word "sweat") says that: "In the sweat of thy face shalt thou eat bread, till thou return unto the ground; for out of it wast thou taken: for dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return."

Of course, not everyone does this nor does everyone have to because of how society evolves and invents better tools.

note: this is not an argument for every tool. Not every tool is ethical.

seestem: About HIM eating meat, I and I has not reached the ites of HIM to compare Iself to HIM like that. Also HIM follows the Ethiopian culture I and I follow Rastafari livity.

Fair enough. As I said, whatever path you choose isn't necessarily wrong. Just different. Haile Selassie I was a Christian. So you could say that he followed another teacher. And that teacher not only ate meat but was notorious for two miracles concerning the eating of fish. I'm not bringing this up to make an argument about whether or not you should eat fish because of this. It's just that someone else brought up H.I.M earlier so I felt it was a necessary response.

Bless up

1 - 1011 - 2021 - 3031 - 4041 - 5051 - 6061 - 7071 - 72

Return to Reasoning List

Haile Selassie I