TWO items have prompted me to write on the subject of Rasta this week.

The first was an April 12 letter to The Gleaner, ‘Free the Rastafarian Religion’ by Linton P Gordon, and the second was an article in a US publication questioning Mitt Romney’s reluctance to answer questions on his Mormon faith. As readers will already know, unless the heavens fall, Romney is certain to be the Republican choice as presidential candidate to face President Obama in the presidential election this November.

As stated in the well-penned Linton P Gordon letter, “In 1971, in the now famous case The Queen v Hines and King, the Court of Appeal of Jamaica upheld the rights of the accused man, Hines, who sought to swear using the name of his God, ‘King Rastafari’. Hines, at his trial in the Supreme Court, declined to swear on the Bible and instead sought to swear by ‘Almighty God, King Rastafari’.

“The judge at the trial refused to allow Hines to swear by Almighty God, King Rastafari, but the Court of Appeal held that Hines should have been permitted to swear according to his religion.

“In so doing, the Court of Appeal of Jamaica recognised that the Rastafarian faith was sufficiently established, structured and existing at a level that it ought to be properly recognised as a religion.”

All an indication that we have come a long way since political independence in 1962.

The fact that the Mormons, foreigners from the USA, have been given the right to practise their religion in Jamaica while Rasta has been accorded no such status is nothing short of scandalous.

In 2005, I did some research on the Mormons, met with the then country president, Leroy Turner, and had a brief and somewhat edgy interview with him. In September of that year I wrote a column, ‘The embarrassing Truth about Mormonism’ and as a result the Jamaican church took out a full-page newspaper ad in an attempt to distance itself from what I had written.

The church arrived in Jamaica in 1968 at a time when the civil rights movement, Black Power and the Black Panther Party were the pressure groups leading the charge against ‘apartheid’ America.

It seems that it is no accident that the Mormons, who prefer to be called the Church of Latter Day Saints (LDS), came to Jamaica in 1968. At that time, a very dunce, racially backward and politically infantile JLP Government, four years before it was rejected by the people, was in the process of nullifying the teachings of, and expelling black Guyanese UWI lecturer Dr Walter Rodney (a PhD at age 24!), declaring that he was “a most dangerous” man, presumably for expounding too much on blackness, Garveyism and the class/colour arrangements in Jamaica at that time. The irony was, we were doing that even as we were heaping condemnation on racist South Africa and Ian Smith’s Rhodesia (now Zimbabwe).

What was the ’embarrassing truth’ in my article? In an extract from Journal of Discourses, Brigham Young, president and second ‘Prophet’ of the Mormon Church, 1844-1877 wrote, “You see some classes of the human family that are black, uncouth, uncomely, disagreeable and low in their habits, wild, and seemingly deprived of nearly all the blessings of the intelligence that is generally bestowed upon mankind.

“The first man that committed the odious crime of killing one of his brethren will be cursed the longest of any one of the children of Adam. Cain slew his brother. Cain might have been killed, and that would have put a termination to that line of human beings.

“This was not to be, and the Lord put a mark upon him, which is the flat nose and black skin. Trace mankind down to after the flood, and then another curse is pronounced upon the same race — that they should be the ‘servant of servants’; and they will be, until that curse is removed.”

Certainly, any rational human being would question the presence of such a church in a country where 95 per cent of our people have black skins, which according to the late second ‘Prophet’ Brigham Young, is a ‘cursed’ state.

It may well have been that the second prophet was simply running off his mouth and expounding on a matter related to his personal position and not one too much out of synch with the American white man’s view of black-skinned people at that time.

I accept that in 1968, no government, JLP or PNP, would have been prepared to grant Rasta religious status because at that time the State was in a real war (waged by surrogates, the JCF) against those who wore locks and professed belief in the divinity of Haile Selassie.

Now, I do not subscribe to any religion, but my argument is rooted in two factors. The first is, the majority of people in the world who subscribe to some religious faith and religion, accept it or not, is here to stay. The second factor is, Rasta in year 50 of our political Independence has more than merited the chance at its shot at a level playingfield.

It seems to me that there had to have been other considerations apart from religious freedom in granting the Mormons religious status. Was it geopolitical or purely political? Or something else which cannot be stated?

A reading of the Book of Mormon would shock any normal Jamaican. Here are just two examples from their ‘bible’.

Example 1: 2 Nephi 5: 21 — ‘And he had caused the cursing to come upon them, yea, even a sore cursing, because of their iniquity. For behold, they had hardened their hearts against him, that they had become like unto a flint; wherefore, as they were white, and exceedingly fair and delightsome, that they might not be enticing unto my people, the Lord God did cause a skin of blackness to come upon them.’

Example 2: Alma 3: 6 — ‘And the skins of the Lamanites were dark, according to the mark which was set upon their fathers, which was a curse upon them because of their transgression and their rebellion against their brethren, who consisted of Nephi, Jacob and Joseph, and Sam, who were just and holy men.’

Natty must ride on and be a hero

Since the church arrived in Jamaica, there has been no doctrinal change or adjustment to the Book of Mormon.

The words still stand and that seems to be what elements in the US press recognise — that Mitt Romney will at some stage be asked to explain this ‘biblical’ derision of black skin in a country where even though the GOP is not expected to snatch any significant percentage of the black vote, that vote still represents a healthy 12 per cent of the US population and there are a few black-skinned people in leadership positions in the GOP.

We have come a far way since the days when the most traumatic happening to befall a household was the realisation that a son or daughter was growing dreadlocks and feasting on black literature. We are not aware that the police are still chasing down adherents to Rasta and cutting off their locks, beating them up in custody (well, that is done, locks or no, to the poor) and referring to them as ‘dutty’ Rasta.

Rasta, in its development over the 50 years of our Independence, has been the most dynamic social and even political movement when compared with other areas in our civic lives. Surely, Rasta is saddled with many charlatans, but the reality of Bob Marley and other high achievers in various sectors has allowed us to live with the pretenders.

We now have Rasta in politics, but of course we know where the epitome of Babylon is placed. Has Rasta joined up with Babylon or is it simply the smart thing to do to infiltrate the ‘enemy’, the better to beat him at his own game?

Many adherents to Rasta have tempered the ultimate objective of the faith — repatriation to the motherland Africa — with the consideration that the real, if not spiritual, trip to the Abyssinia of their dreams includes the possession of millions of dollars, many miles from the physical Babylon and too many hours of air travel. Many live in the dreams of the rich who do it.

Plus, many have awakened from the impossible dream of reparation.

Rasta politicians must lead the charge

There was no doubt that in the last election, one of the most exciting candidates to have won a seat was the PNP’s Damion Crawford.

On the assumption that Crawford is more Rasta than his locks indicate, I would expect that he would place himself in the forefront of those trying to get Rasta official religious status in Jamaica 50.

There may be a problem though. Oftentimes social change is easier when the charge is led from outside. With Crawford on the inside there are those who will want to say that the country has other more important matters to worry about than Rasta being made an official religion.

Young Crawford will realise that many of our young men are finding themselves lost in the chase to attain economic viability. What better way to save many of them than a religion that actually works, one which preaches education and love of self-image and the princess at home. Crawford needs his lobbyists to assist him from the outside because he may find himself hemmed in.

observemark@gmail.com