@Black heart
"Human sacrifice was common in West African states up to and during the 19th century. The Annual customs of Dahomey was the most notorious example, but sacrifices were carried out all along the West African coast and further inland. Sacrifices were particularly common after the death of a King or Queen, and there are many recorded cases of hundreds or even thousands of slaves being sacrificed at such events. Sacrifices were particularly common in Dahomey, in the Benin Empire, in what is now Ghana, and in the small independent states in what is now southern Nigeria.
In the Asante region of modern day Ghana, human sacrifice was often combined with capital punishment.
In the northern parts of West Africa, human sacrifice had become rare early as Islam became more established in these areas such as the Hausa States. Human sacrifice was officially banned in the remainder of West African states only by coercion, or in some cases annexation, by either the British or French. An important step was the British coercing the powerful Egbo secret society to oppose human sacrifice in 1850. This society was powerful in a large number of states in what is now south-eastern Nigeria. Nonetheless, human sacrifice continued, normally in secret, until West Africa came under firm colonial control.
The Leopard men were a West African secret society active into mid-1900s that practised cannibalism. In theory, the ritual cannibalism would strengthen both members of the society as well as their entire tribe. In Tanganyika, the Lion men committed an estimated 200 murders in a single three-month period"
Child sacrifice still occurs in regions of Africa, specifically Uganda, to this day. It is often carried out by so-called "witch-doctors" who make money by murdering children for superstitious wealthy people who believe that child-sacrifice will make them more rich.
Cannibalism is a well known-practice in Africa and I've met refugees from the Congo first hand who were forced to murder their friends/family, drink their blood, and eat their body parts. The horrors of being a child-soldier in modern-day Africa are beyond belief. Modern day cannibalism (the cannibalized are usually murdered, not willing) is justified and often goes uncontested because of its cultural roots in Africa. It's a cultural practice, so it must be ok, right?
"There is evidence, both archeological and genetic, that cannibalism has been practiced for tens of thousands of years. Human bones that have been "de-fleshed" by other humans go back 600 000 years. The oldest Homo sapiens bones (from Ethiopia) show signs of this as well."
As for tribal customs of cannibalism, I have no comment as it's not my place to judge the morality of such practices. But surely for the of vast majority of us we can say that we've evolved past such customs as cannibalism, and I should hope that we've learned over time that this kind of practice is generally undesirable.
--------------------------
@Humble one
I see where you are coming from, but I don't think gay people need guidance or "help" being straight. It's ok to be gay, nobody has to "lead them to the light" or help them with their "problem". Perhaps that wasn't what you were trying to say, but it appears as though you're arguing that being gay is still wrong and it's up to us to help "fix" gay people. I would find that mentality just as downpressive and disempowering. There's nothing wrong with being homosexual and nobody has to help them.
And is a "natural" relationship only one in which sexual reproduction can occur? If this is the case, any relationship between a sterile man and woman is unnatural...any woman who cannot give birth cannot have a "natural" relationship, and any couple which practices celibacy is "unnatural" according to this logic. We do not live in Darwinian world where our lives are dictated by cold, biological facts. LOVE is what makes a relationship and not the ability to procreate. And I stand by that ALL LOVE IS NATURAL. Love is a natural state in-of itself. Love is an extension of life. To go against life is to try to bar an individual from loving someone else. It is unnatural and "against life" to try to define love, to make it binary, to constrict it, box it in, and tell someone who they can or cannot love. Come to think of it, I cannot procreate with most of the things and people that I love...does this mean that all of my relationships, with both people and my environment, are unnatural?
-----------------------
Homosexuality has occurred in every human society since the dawn of time, including (as I've pointed out) the societies of Africa. It has even been documented to occur in certain species of mammals in nature. Many cultures have accepted it and just as many have persecuted it. Regardless, I don't see why we should limit ourselves to the customs of our ancestors especially when we don't do so when said customs are clearly outdated. The cultural argument against homosexuality is a completely moot point when we're discarding aspects of African culture all the time to suit our current needs. You can't just pick and choose like that and then use our culture as a blanket justification for persecution...Africa has many many many cultural practices; some of them are beautiful and still valued today. Others are dark, irrelevant to modern people, and downright wrong. We cannot forget the mistakes of the past. To ignore them is an act of willful ignorance.
If it's all about life, why limit the life of our brothers and sisters? Would the words of Marcus Garvey be any less significant if they had come from a gay man? If Marcus Garvey turned out to be secretly homosexual, would it in any way change the content of his message? His writing would still read the same, and his speeches would sound the same. The only difference that would be made is that which you create in your own mind. When judging others, imagine that they are quite literally your brother or sister. Would you condemn your own kin to the fiyah simply because you find homosexuality distasteful? If you ask I that is comparable to persecuting someone for having a different taste in music or food.
|
|
