HE OR HER WITH AN 85
Within the bounds of our teachings a dichotomy can be difficult to reconcile. Yet within the social equality of Gods and Earths, intimate dichotomies has long been an accepted practice; primarily among male nation members. This creates a kind of cultural crossroads. It is maintained as an acceptable system of kinship among some brothers. Some consider it a privilege, a prerogative, even a birthright. Understandably, it has gone un-applauded by Earths; their objections more or less dismissed out of hand.
Conversely, attraction to an 85% male by an Earth, has traditionally resulted in a virtual if not official exit from our ranks. Historically, such unions see Earths falling victim, leaving the nation, and taking the seeds into hell with them. This is actually the greater tragedy since children born of these unions often fall to the wayside and simply add to the population of the 85%. As a social standard, the nation's consensus vigorously rejects this practice. Denouncement by the prominent, and a general public disapproval, threatens peer disdain and a perceived lower status. As a subject of controversy, historically it has only weighed in as a pale rival to other more prevalent kinship issues like polygamy for example. With scant consideration, the status quo persists; and un-propelled to sufficient prominence, inertia keeps it low on the ladder of discourse. This in no way mitigates its significance.
At the most elementary stage of traditional instruction, our teachings emphasize the significance of life's mathematical sequence. The advent of the nation family unified in the culture of I-God, is like the universal flag itself. It represents our highest attainable ideals in all their configurations. The practiced ideals in the family unit sit at an axis between the personal enlightenment of the individual and our collective national state.The enlightening of children, women, and men is what builds the population. In some schools of thought there is a belief in a correlation between a God’s personal development and the cultural state of his mate. At our highest achieved standards, it is reasoned that our social equality should resonate the culture of I-God on all planes.
In the families of some Gods, there is a substitution of a righteous Earth under our banner, for an 85% woman. Among women of the world, the superior existence of the Earth is unsurpassed in her capacity to regency, beauty and love. Righteous black women are as precious jewels and evident are their halos. Rare are those that elevate to the plane of Queen. Attraction to a particular God in the nation is one of the principal means by which our ranks of Earths are replenished. It has been argued though, that this is insufficient justification for desiring to study. The advent however, of many sisters elevating to an Earth worthy on her own merits, calls that argument into serious question. Many enjoy long national tenures as great Queens. Some even outlast their educators.
The cumulative effect of this practice seems more a personal conflict, if that, with a difficult to discern national impact. Conversely though, our nation has produced many devout, highly capable patriots who in their history, for whatever reasons, chose an 85% to lay foundation with. Many of these are great leaders with legions of students to their credit, and with sound credentials regarding the good of the nation.
However short of Allah's world manifest, pragmatism may require flexibility of form for certain individuals. Thus, in a practical, what I am capable of today type reality; many won’t be qualified to raise a sweat, let alone a righteous Earth. Shall he who is unequipped also be undeserving, even to seek among the unenlightened?
The notion of unalike attract and alike repel, and other derivative concepts from the mathematical format, is not intended as an agent for oppression of black women. Nor is it for disenfranchisement from their glorious crowns. Unfortunately, for numerous reasons by some unyielding, it becomes just such a device.
The nation is. It has always been what it is, based upon those who teach, not those who fail to. Who though, really has the power to cast one out? Who can deny those that do not deny themselves?
Likely, and on the face of these perspectives, one might quickly concur. Is this however, much different than the yield of divorce? Dissolution of even highly respected national families often result in departure from our cultural standard, whatever that is.
The nation of gods and earths, as nations go is but at its infancy. The life of a man is but a miniscule fraction of the life of a nation. It is in this time of vestigial creation that our advancing of pertinent issues on a collective front ultimately renders institutions, renders traditions and customs, and also renders folklore. As I once read in some historic national literature, "DO YOUR DUTY. BUILD YOUR NATION."
Elamjad Born Allah