Does Our Treatment of Animals Affect How We Treat Each Other?

[Akasha]

Some of the greatest human minds seemed to think so:


For as long as men massacre animals, they will kill each other. Indeed, he who sows the seed of murder and pain cannot reap joy and love.

Pythagoras (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pythagoras)


As long as there are slaughterhouses, there will be battlefields.

Leo Tolstoy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leo_Tolstoy)


What I think about vivisection is that if people admit that they have the right to take or endanger the life of living beings for the benefit of many, there will be no limit to their cruelty.

Leo Tolstoy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leo_Tolstoy)


Our task must be to free ourselves . . . by widening our circle of compassion to embrace all living creatures and the whole of nature and its beauty.

Albert Einstein (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Einstein)


Nothing will benefit human health and increase chances of survival for life on earth as much as the evolution to a vegetarian diet.

Albert Einstein (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Einstein)


Non-violence leads to the highest ethics, which is the goal of all evolution. Until we stop harming all other living beings, we are still savages.

Thomas Edison (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Edison)


The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated.

Mahatma Gandhi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahatma_Gandhi)


To my mind, the life of a lamb is no less precious than that of a human being.

Mahatma Gandhi (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahatma_Gandhi)


In their behavior toward creatures, all men are Nazis. Human beings see oppression vividly when they're the victims. Otherwise they victimize blindly and without a thought.

Isaac Bashevis Singer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaac_Bashevis_Singer)


While we ourselves are the living graves of murdered beasts, how can we expect any ideal conditions on this earth?

George Bernard Shaw (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Bernard_Shaw)


Atrocities are not less atrocities when they occur in laboratories and are called medical research.

George Bernard Shaw (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Bernard_Shaw)


Living Graves

By George Bernard Shaw (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Bernard_Shaw)


We are the living graves of murdered beasts,

Slaughtered to satisfy our appetites.

We never pause to wonder at our feasts,

If animals, like men, can possibly have rights.

We pray on Sundays that we may have light,

To guide our footsteps on the path we tread.

We’re sick of War, we do not want to fight –

The thought of it now fills our hearts with dread,

And yet – we gorge ourselves upon the dead.

Like carrion crows, we live and feed on meat,

Regardless of the suffering and pain

We cause by doing so, if thus we treat

Defenseless animals for sport or gain,

How can we hope in this world to attain

The PEACE we say we are so anxious for.

We pray for it, o’er hecatombs of slain,

To God, while outraging the moral law.

Thus cruelty begets its offspring – WAR

Feel free to comment regarding the question posed in the thread title and the quotes shared in the O.P. as well as sharing any other quotes by great minds on the subject.

I appreciate that this is a sensitive topic but can we all please, please, please maintain a level of civility and respect for one another that is becoming of Avalon as well as making every effort to stay on topic : I feel this subject is too important to be reduced to another "food fight" as Fred so aptly put it previously.

[Spiral of Light]

“Think occasionally of the suffering of which you spare yourself the sight.”
― Albert Schweitzer

[4Talismans]

How can we have respect for life when it's on our plate every day?

[Nothingness]

This is only my thoughts:

How dense or how light we are in our consciousness affects the way we see things and how much of things we do see. We have to chose (because of free will) to want to be more conscious and work at it, so somehow we have to get to that point, or we do get to that point because evolvement is ongoing--and it is an individual choice, not the choice of someone else.

Basically, unless we are truly enlightened on this planet, and there are many who have had impressive lighted awakenings, but are/were still not totally enlightened, and therefore still even more susceptible to falling or loosing a great deal of ground if they aren't vigilant. But even the enlightened can fall below enlightenment (especially on Earth). It is always a persistent endeavor to stay on the path, to achieve even more levels of endless enlightenment and other journeys.

Animals and humans will be mistreated by people who are operating out of a first chakra mode. They are in some deep darkness, and some are not completely operating there, but have energy there that they fall into at times. In most cases they are blind because they don't have the consciousness to see very far. They don't even have consciousness of what they are doing, but this seems to be the way entities progress, and they do progress, however long it takes.

I think we all start at the bottom at one point or another, or have worked our way back there via issues and karma. It is said in some esoteric Hindu scriptures that we live 678,000 lives before we get to a life that we even hear about enlightenment. We can have other lives on other planets, too. It is also said given the current situation and how we handle it, the Earth may remain a planet with just animals, and there will be no further use of this planet for growth by other beings.

With 678,000 lives most of us have had all the experiences (played different archetypes and combinations of) and none of us is guilt-free. Carl Jungs' shadow work is a reflection of that in many ways--of laying claim to all shadows to achieve wholeness because we are both dark and light--and it is the dance of both dark and light that allows us to evolve.

None of us likes to admit we've been animal abusers, but in reality, we are composite of all that exists on this earth and beyond. There go we, but for the grace of God, or the Universe, or Whatever. We engender all things. To be whole we can't just love the animal, we also have to love the abuser to be whole--to encompass the totality and move beyond even that.

Everyone and everything is on a journey like everything else in eternity, and even animals can be saints and gain spiritual progression when they, like very evolved Buddhists who light themselves on fire (they actually don't feel it and it is more like a purification) for causes. Animals can gain or loss karma, too, and progress spiritually. I also think our wholeness and consciousness allows us to transcend the illusions of being in a body and progress to other existences. So, it is a part of Isness and wholeness. It's life playing out its wholeness.

[etheric underground]

Thank you for some great quotes. It is always hard for people to come to terms with the realisation that we kill and eat our own brothers and sisters for no real reason other than to feast......as the new blood of my tribe ( ngai tahu) I am constantly reminded of the responsibility to the honouring of the animals who sacrifice there flesh and energy to enable me to be who I AM.... We once only took the lives of few for the requirements of survival...and even then we placed great honour to those animals for there service to us for providing us with there life force.
It goes along way to pay respect every time a side of beef or a chickens carcass or a fish is brought to your plate in your need to eat and survive......REMEMBER these animals give themselves knowingly for our benefit....give respect to each and every animal you place in your mouth...

[DeDukshyn]

One does not affect the other -- the mind affects each.

[Ellisa]

Certainly children who tease and torture animals for fun grow up to be harsh and cruel people who still treat animals badly, and often progress to mistreating other people. Whilst I think that sometimes such children are badly treated themselves, unfortunately some of us just enjoy hurting animals and other humans as entertainment.

I am not a vegetarian, and I do understand that eating flesh can seem repugnant, however I do think that meat can be produced without cruelty. We just need to ensure it is, and buy or consume the produce that is cruelty-free. It is on sale-- unfortunately at premium prices.

Personally I believe that we humans need to consume meat to stay healthy. We are omnivores after all, though I am very sympathetic to the opposite point of view!

It is of great importance that our dealings with animals are free from cruelty. We let ourselves down otherwise. I feel sorry for anyone who has not established a loving and positive relationship with an animal -- pet or not.

[TargeT]

Hey! Another thread prosthelytizing vegan-ism.....

Just what I was looking forward to, I bet if we combined the many threads on this topic we'd have one hell of a dogmatic read.

At least this one is fairly light on the logical fallacies

[donk]

Dang...I was enjoying the empathy for animals. While I have some for the plants I steal my energy, I relate more to the animals...guess my heart bleeds a little more for them.

Anywho, I just wanna say while I try judge anyone that eats meat--it'd be the ultimate hyppocracy--or prostyletizes veganism, I enjoyed the quotes, a morality-free food (for thought)

Sincerely, a self loathing animal eater

[Akasha]

To maintain some sort of order on this thread, it would be appreciated if folk could try to adhere to the suggestions in the O.P. with regard to their responses.

Would those in opposition please take the time to share why they disagree with, Einstein, Tolstoy, Pythagoras, George Bernard Shaw, Leonardo da Vinci et al.


I have from an early age abjured the use of meat, and the time will come when men such as I will look upon the murder of animals as they now look upon the murder of men.”

Leonardo da Vinci (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leonardo_da_Vinci)

I think we can all agree that we are opposed to war and cruelty and these great minds were trying to share their insight on the matter.


"Humanely killed" is an oxymoron with, perhaps, the exception of euthanasia

anonymous

[Akasha]

Here's a couple more quotes:


The assumption that animals are without rights, and the illusion that our treatment of them has no moral significance, is a positively outrageous example of Western crudity and barbarity. Universal compassion in the only guarantee of morality.

Arthur Schopenhauer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arthur_Schopenhauer)


We must fight against the spirit of unconscious cruelty with which we treat the animals. Animals suffer as much as we do. True humanity does not allow us to impose such sufferings on them. It is our duty to make the whole world recognize it. Until we extend our circle of compassion to all living things, humanity will not find peace.

Albert Schweitzer (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Schweitzer)

[Akasha]

.....and one from Plutarch addressing the notion that we are designed to eat animals:


A human body in no way resembles those that were born for ravenousness; it hath no hawk’s bill, no sharp talon, no roughness of teeth, no such strength of stomach or heat of digestion, as can be sufficient to convert or alter such heavy and fleshy fare. But if you will contend that you were born to an inclination to such food as you have now a mind to eat, do you then yourself kill what you would eat. But do it yourself, without the help of a chopping-knife, mallet or axe, as wolves, bears, and lions do, who kill and eat at once. Rend an ox with thy teeth, worry a hog with thy mouth, tear a lamb or a hare in pieces, and fall on and eat it alive as they do. But if thou had rather stay until what thou eat is to become dead, and if thou art loath to force a soul out of its body, why then dost thou against nature eat an animate thing? There is nobody that is willing to eat even a lifeless and a dead thing even as it is; so they boil it, and roast it, and alter it by fire and medicines, as it were, changing and quenching the slaughtered gore with thousands of sweet sauces, that the palate being thereby deceived may admit of such uncouth fare.”

Plutarch (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plutarch)

NB: I'm going to try to link all authors of quotes' names to their Wiki' page. If folk sharing other quotes could edit their posts accordingly too, I think it would be helpful to everyone reading this thread.

[Akasha]

In the following podcast, Mark Passio delves deep into the subject of carnism. He spells out why it is, in fact, a religion as well as making the link between the phenomenon and global enslavement, given the unavoidable effects of natural law.

http://www.whatonearthishappening.com/podcasts/WOEIH-121.mp3 (http://www.whatonearthishappening.com/podcasts/WOEIH-121.mp3)

NB: fast forward to 22.45 for the presentation.

[lunaflare]

I have from an early age abjured the use of meat,....Leonardi Da Vinci clearly showed a heightened sensitivity as a young boy; a compassionate sensitivity he was able to bring into his adult years. I am sure he was marginalized for such thinking! The other quotes also suggest minds who saw the abuse animals as abhorrent and a poor reflection on human morals and thus consciousness. Of course there is the misconception that all people who choose to be vegetarian are compassionate or more elevated in their thinking. Alas, not. The capacity for human cruelty comes in the form of our "shadow" selves as Jung was able to articulate so very well. We are all capable of harming others- people or animals-as we all carry a shadow. Darn.
I think the point of this post, however, is to be reminded of the many shades of gray in our human behaviour-and to become more aware of our own actions and choices. We are a mass of contradictions as we walk our way through this realm of duality...and, YES we do have choice. I agree there are young children who seem wired from a young age to be cruel and without compassion. As a society we have an obligation to mitigate their actions for the benefit of the "whole" organism.
Where there is goodness, there will be evil. The percentage of "darkness" in the human species is far smaller. Light exists in darkness which is the conundrum of this plane.

[mischief]

I still eat meat, very little, but I do.
I buy only from a local farmer, who I know personally, and know how he treats his animals and the land they live on.
I know these are killed very quickly and humanely, do not travel in stuffy trucks to fear reeking slaughterhouses, but removed to the local butchers shop only after they are shot.
I understand others will still find this abhorent, but having tried a vegetarian diet, I got sick and had to stop.
Perhaps I didnt do it right somehow.
Currently, I am trying to turn our backyard into a garden in the hopes of providing all our food and have started looking at how I can replace our protein from meat to veg.Meanwhile, I try to eat as little meat as I can in order to wean myself off it, physically and mentally.

[Abhaya]

I like the example from the earthlings movie. Humanity has grown In it's awareness of equality over time. We overcame racism, sexism, sexual preference and more. But the next step may be speciesism. We will truly be an advanced society when we recognize consciousness as the great equalizer that makes us all brothers on the same path

[Akasha]

In the following podcast, Mark Passio delves deep into the subject of carnism. He spells out why it is, in fact, a religion as well as making the link between the phenomenon and global enslavement, given the unavoidable effects of natural law.

http://www.whatonearthishappening.com/podcasts/WOEIH-121.mp3 (http://www.whatonearthishappening.com/podcasts/WOEIH-121.mp3)

NB: fast forward to 22.45 for the presentation.

Since there has been practically zero feedback regarding the above podcast, and given it's groundbreaking content, I'm going to assume it was just lost in the sea of other threads and therefore give it a :bump2:.

I would also encourage folk to listen to podcast 122 (http://www.whatonearthishappening.com/podcasts/WOEIH-122.mp3) and podcast 123 (http://www.whatonearthishappening.com/podcasts/WOEIH-123.mp3) in which Mark Passio elaborates further on the subject.

Accompanying images, documents and videos of the podcasts can be found on his actual podcasts page (http://www.whatonearthishappening.com/podcast) below the relevant podcast link.

I appreciate that for many this subject is a tough pill to swallow, but try and get it down anyway. You can always bring it up again if it really disagrees with you :).

[Akasha]

:bump: :bump: :bump:

[Akasha]

So I just came across the (closed) Human Carnivore Myth thread and it is now abundantly clear why no-one is touching this thread with a barge-pole. If I had known about that thread, I wouldn't have bothered starting this one, honest. I will now let this thread die it's inevitable death, but that's not to denigrate it's content, especially Passio's podcasts on the topic as well as the thoughts of all the greats I quoted in the OP. Are we really that bold to shout down the likes of Einstein, Pythagoras and Da Vinci? Humanity will ignore this info' at our collective peril, spiritually and physically, but we will never know this was the cause of our continued demise.

[Nanoo Nanoo]

appreciate anything you have to eat.

anything you eat was once alive

even plants have feelings

i agree less animal slaughtering , most definitely ! but alll iving things have life and it is good karma to be thankful and appreciative of whatever you eat as it has sacrificed its self for you to live , wether it wanted to or not...

i completely agree while we slaughter animals , we have little chance of peace .. as this is an act that does not recognise what the slaughter of animals does ... in turn does not account for the thought process required to kill ... if you can kill an ant or a fly then you are just as accountable for acts against other sentient beings...

the question is can we sustain reasonable 4 and 5 d ethics in a 3 d paradigm ? we can try but it is not easy .. however the reason for all this is to make the REALISATION of such things ... this is the lesson.

Naniu

[lunaflare]

Hey Akasha, why was the Human Carnivore Myth thread closed (in your opinion);
Animal products are very high in cholesterol for us humanoids...oh and not the "good" kind!

[Akasha]

Hey Akasha, why was the Human Carnivore Myth thread closed (in your opinion);

Hi lunaflare, I don't think it would be appropriate to answer that question on this thread although I will say that threads of this nature are particularly easy to derail because when one poster is inflammatory or goes off topic, a reactionary response will generally just result in the thread going further off topic still. Posts of that nature are much better handled with a simple :focus: post rather than a diametrically opposed reaction.

Now.......:focus:

[Akasha]

Guy walks into a McDonalds and shows kids slaughterhouse footage.....





.....sorry if you were waiting for a punchline.

veqdm5zbggQ

[AutumnW]

I still eat meat, very little, but I do.
I buy only from a local farmer, who I know personally, and know how he treats his animals and the land they live on.
I know these are killed very quickly and humanely, do not travel in stuffy trucks to fear reeking slaughterhouses, but removed to the local butchers shop only after they are shot.
I understand others will still find this abhorent, but having tried a vegetarian diet, I got sick and had to stop.
Perhaps I didnt do it right somehow.
Currently, I am trying to turn our backyard into a garden in the hopes of providing all our food and have started looking at how I can replace our protein from meat to veg.Meanwhile, I try to eat as little meat as I can in order to wean myself off it, physically and mentally.

I can't go vegetarian either. Too many food allergies. Meat is one of the few things I can tolerate without getting migraines. Bummer. I do most of the things you do though. A few weeks ago, my sister-in-law, (a vegetarian) and I were talking and I told her that if I had a hobby farm and raised my own chickens for meat, I wouldn't be able to kill them, if I had a relationship with them--no matter how humane the method, unless I was starving. This launched a tirade of, 'What difference does it make. You're going to eat them anyway!" A valid point, I guess. However...I wouldn't want their last moments or even milliseconds of life to be of someone they might consider their mother, hurting them in any way. Call me crazy!

This is a divisive topic and a necessary one. If you are going to eat meat, do it consciously.

[Akasha]

...I wouldn't want their last moments or even milliseconds of life to be of someone they might consider their mother, hurting them in any way. Call me crazy!

Thanks for your honesty, AutumnW. I certainly wouldn't label you as crazy for sharing such thoughts. The cognitive dissonance that is at play in this situation is fundamentally linked to our core values. It's just that we are taught from day one (unless you had vegan parents) to eat meat. In most cases it isn't until children are older that they make the link between the cute furry/feathery animals in their children's books and what's on their plate, by which time the synapses are well established to the point that logical fallacies will be utilised to perpetuate the connection.

The following presentation by qualified psychologist and author, Melanie Joy, explains the thought processes at play and the reasons/excuses for them as well as offering thoughtful alternatives to the dilemma.

7vWbV9FPo_Q


This is a divisive topic

True.



and a necessary one.

Very true!

It's with your above comments that I am making every effort to maintain decorum within this thread for as long as it remains "alive".

[Akasha]

Here's a quote by Wade Frasier,from his very poignant essay, A Vegetarian's Journey (http://www.ahealedplanet.net/veggie.htm), reiterating the sentiments of this thread:


Humanity’s murderous ways are directly related to its carnivorous ways.

Wade Frasier (http://www.ahealedplanet.net/home.htm)

[RMorgan]

Yeah, mate...Being a vegetarian for all these years, I always think about that.

I guess there are a lot of variables involved in this situation...I mean, behind the eating meat thing.

I have nothing against eating meat, if the eater really knows what's he doing...In fact, I admire the hunting lifestyle, you know, the guy who picks up his bow and arrow, go to the woods and hunt. The animal has several perceptive advantages over a human being, and if the hunter manages to kill something, it's because he earned it. A hunter works within the laws of nature, which are ruthless.

What I really can't accept is the average Joe who buys meat at the supermarket like it was a fruit or bread...Most people know about the cruelty involved in the meat industry; It's not a secret. However, they simply choose to ignore it...Choosing ignorance is one of many things that, in my opinion, constitute the metaphorical act of "selling your soul to the devil".

Anyway, being vegetarian is a personal choice, and I'm all for making choices, as long as people know what they are doing...There are lot of vegetarians that don't know what they're doing as well; They become vegetarians for a lot of reasons, like becoming vegetarians because their religion says this is the way to go (indoctrination), or following a trend (fashion)...

In my opinion, the most important thing is awareness...Most people simply live on auto-pilot mode, never really aware of what they're doing...This is the real problem.

If everybody was really aware ( I mean really aware) of what happens during the whole process that happens until they can eat their succulent burgers, I'm sure a lot would become vegetarians, some would decide to eat less meat, some others would demand a serious change in the meat industry...I'm ok with all of that, as long as people are aware and thinking about things.

Now, if people choose to be ignorant regarding this issue, to turn their faces to the other side, then it's serious, because ignorance is not a button that you can turn on and off only in certain portions of your consciousness...When you choose ignorance, it takes over your whole mind.

So, in my opinion, the violent way we treat each other is not a consequence of the act of eating meat itself, but a consequence of choosing to ignore, a consequence of living an auto-pilot life...The root of this problem is much more complicated.

This whole thing is so old, I mean, look at the old testament as a reference of how old it is...God tells Adam not to eat the damn fruit...Adam simply chooses to ignore God (Who in his sane mind would ignore a direct advice from God himself?)...I'm not religious at all, in fact, I'm an atheist; I'm just using the bible as a reference of how old this "choose to ignore" thing is.

Raf.

[Akasha]

Continued from here (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?63983-Sugar-is-good.-The-sugar-conspiracy-scam-hoax&p=741955&viewfull=1#post741955) where the dialogue was getting off topic.



I've seen too many vegans whose health has fallen apart due to the restrictions of their chosen diet.

If that is true, it's because they chose to restrict their vegan diet, not because they simply went vegan.



Compassion is a wonderful quality, but one has to have compassion for one's self as well.

If the principle of non-violence is not absolute, it's not a principle.



I've seen a lot of judgmental self-righteous vegan fanatics over the years, have even been one myself, but I've stopped being so judgmental.

My judgement of you carries no punishment. Your judgement of the chicken as food sentences it to death.



Resorting to name calling to get others to bow to my supposed superiority is not at all convincing, IMHO, quite the contrary.

Not sure where the name-calling accusations come from but never mind. Kind of ironic that you're calling me a name-caller though.

It doesn't bother me wether I'm perceived as convincing or not, rather that I state the truth, especially on issues of violation.



I certainly do think killing unnecessarily is wrong, as is causing unnecessary suffering.

Glad to here it. When is it ever really necessary if one removes service to self situations?



I look forward both to a world where people are no longer in judgement of each other and where killing is entirely a thing of the past.

Change starts with us, from within and ideally, now. That's why I'm doing it. Why not join me?



I don't think it's that far off, but it will come much sooner when we stop judging each other, and look instead to see what we can improve in ourselves.

Are you saying that the sooner vegans stop trying to alleviate the suffering of animals by shouting the injustice from the rooftops, the sooner we'll all go vegan???

As I see it, the suffering which the human race continues to undergo is directly related to the suffering it meets out on animals whilst under the illusion that there is no effect, physical or energetic, from such actions, ergo, I am and continue to be affected directly and very negatively by other's choices on this issue, choices that could be different, particularly when made by those who would otherwise be compassionate, loving individuals.

[Referee]

This has always been a fundamental Law for me. I just knew it inherently. No one had to tell me I told many others in my Life and dedicated my life's work to it.

[onawah]

I am under no illusions about the seriousness, the extent or the ramifications of this issue.
But how my eating meat might affect you is entirely up to you.
If you choose to be affected by it, that is your decision.

I have loved animals dearly all my life, and I feel great compassion for them.
I could easily have become an extremist animal activist.
It made me crazy to think about the needless suffering of innocent animals at the hands of ignorant and uncaring humans, and also to think of wild predators hurting and killing other wild animals, especially the young.
It makes me crazy still if I dwell on it, but dwelling on it does neither me nor the animals any good at all.

I have come across a lot of other crazy idealists, drama queens (and outright performers), perfectionists, agonizers, striving self deniers and control freaks on my spiritual journey.
All of us trying so hard to silence our guilt, our fears, our cravings, our doubts, our anguish, our imperfections with various spiritual practices and lifestyle transformations and belief systems, to mold ourselves into any form other than the ones we found ourselves in.
I could certainly never accept the premise that the animal oversouls, for want of a better term, signed up for their various species to be food for humans in the circle of life of 3 D existence.
I could not accept the idea of a Creator who would design dimensions where there was so much suffering.

Neither could I accept my own non-acceptance, my resentment and hatred of the cruelty in the world I found myself in.
Non-acceptance was really hidden at the base of all my spiritual practice.
I could not accept myself or the way things are, and all my spiritual journey was an effort to escape having to deal with the incomprehensible idea that everything might actually be perfect just as it is.
There was no way I could believe or accept that.
In my mind, just about everything was WRONG.

But finally, at 65 years of age, that is beginning to change, and I am very grateful for it.
In a way, it puts me at odds with my former self and perhaps also with all those people that I used to try so hard to impress and to be like, but it is very intriguing to me now to see this trend in myself.

I experienced that feeling of acceptance when I attained states of samadhi, satori and prolonged altered states of consciousness at various times in my life.
But I could never remain there permanently, and I think perhaps that was because I had only found temporary detours around my programmed mind which could never imagine that everything could be perfect just as it is even as my everyday consciousness perceives the world to be.
So I always felt like I had so much more work to do, and I know I still do, but I seem to be arriving at a new plateau that feels different from all that's gone before.

Now, I would be very happy if my body did well on a vegan diet, but it never really has.
Perhaps that will change, and I think I will know it if that happens.
If not, I ardently hope that in my next incarnation, I will be born into a vegan or vegetarian family with genes and a body type that will naturally want and need only to be vegan or at least vegetarian, and will be healthy that way.
I know people who want to be breatharians, and I agree that would be great, but that aspiration is still too far in the future for me to think about at this point.
Just being vegan would eliminate a lot of concerns that I would rather not have to deal with.
But physiologically, I am not there yet.
Heck, even the Dalia Lama isn't there yet!
So I am not going to punish myself until I AM there, and I'm not going to concern myself overmuch about anyone else's opinions on that score.
Been there, done that.

Meanwhile, I am profoundly grateful to the animals who are providing my body with food, and I will use the strength of my body to be of service to others as much as I can, to give back in gratitude for the gifts of sustenance that I am receiving.
I am still a part of the 3D circle of life existence where that is a part of human reality, and I am in much more acceptance of that now, which I consider to be a good thing.
I hope to continue to take each step on my spiritual journey as it presents itself to me, not rushing things, not pushing the river, not presuming that all is not perfect just as it is, seeking the Middle Path, the way of balance and acceptance.

And I don't really have anything else to say about it.





As I see it, the suffering which the human race continues to undergo is directly related to the suffering it meets out on animals whilst under the illusion that there is no effect, physical or energetic, from such actions, ergo, I am and continue to be affected directly and very negatively by other's choices on this issue, choices that could be different, particularly when made by those who would otherwise be compassionate, loving individuals.

[Akasha]

.....But how my eating meat might affect you is entirely up to you.
If you choose to be affected by it, that is your decision.....

Dear Onawah,

I wasn't aiming my last statement specifically at you, rather the carnivorous collective as a whole. Sorry for not making that clear enough in the last paragraph of my previous post.
To clarify: Natural law dictates that all beings are sovereign. When we dominate another (carnism being the ultimate expression of dominance), we are encroaching on that being's sovereignty and as such will be subject to natural law: we will reap what we sow, as we do to others, so will it be down to us, as above so below etc....I posit that our enslavement is directly related to the collective majority's carnistic tendencies.

[Akasha]

This has always been a fundamental Law for me. I just knew it inherently. No one had to tell me I told many others in my Life and dedicated my life's work to it.

Many thanks for the input, Ref' - much appreciated, but could you possibly clarify what "this" is? I'm not sure if you are referencing the thread title or one of the quotes or something else. I'm intrigued by what you have shared. Would you care to elaborate?

Cheers.

[Lancelot]

I understand that everything living on this planet is connected.
Is killing an animal the same as the killing a tree, or killing a person the same as killing a plant? I need some clarification here.

My friend is a staunch vegan and recently called me a murderer for eating chicken. I pointed out that he chops plants and trees down so he is just as much of a murderer as I am. Is this right? Do people/animals/plants all have the same rights as living beings on this planet?

IMO its really about intention to ending a life, if you're chopping a tree down or killing an animal to survive, tell it first from the heart, explain that it is for the greater good, communicate to them on an inner level and make your intention clear.

Every living thing dies but every living thing deserves to die with minimal suffering and a good intention....

What do you think?

[Akasha]

I understand that everything living on this planet is connected.
Is killing an animal the same as the killing a tree, or killing a person the same as killing a plant? I need some clarification here.

My friend is a staunch vegan and recently called me a murderer for eating chicken. I pointed out that he chops plants and trees down so he is just as much of a murderer as I am. Is this right? Do people/animals/plants all have the same rights as living beings on this planet?

IMO its really about intention to ending a life, if you're chopping a tree down or killing an animal to survive, tell it first from the heart, explain that it is for the greater good, communicate to them on an inner level and make your intention clear.

Every living thing dies but every living thing deserves to die with minimal suffering and a good intention....

What do you think?

Hi Lancelot.

Is that your reasoning behind killing animals?

Cheers.

[Lancelot]

[/QUOTE]

Hi Lancelot.

Is that your reasoning behind killing animals?

Cheers.[/QUOTE]

Akasha,

No, this is not my reasoning behind killing animals.

My previous post was an attempt to de-polarise this thread from the inevitable 'us v them meat eaters' and to pose the greater questions-

-Is an animal life more valuable than a tree or a human?
-Is is fine to kill trees, plants and other living things but not animals?
-Should intention and conscious connection come into the inevitable process of death?

If you believe that eating meat is not for you I respect that. However, choosing not to eat meat does not place you on some higher moral ground to go around judging others. Isn't that similar to what religious fanatics do? We are all connected and there are deeper questions here to be answered.
I do not agree that 'enslavement is directly related to the collective majority's carnistic tendencies.' Could explain your reasoning behind this?

What goes on in slaughterhouses and the way animals are killed must effect the planet on some vibrational level. Is the answer to eradicate this completely or to change the way it is consciously done? (perhaps Halal goes some way towards this) If we make a conscious decision on this planet to outlaw the killing of animals then how would we deal with a lion who instinctively kills a deer to eat? Put it in a cage and feed it vegetables?

[Akasha]

Hi Lancelot,

I appreciate your attempts to de-polarise this thread although I'm not entirely sure that's possible given it's nature.

Do you think the likes of Pythagoras, Einstein and Da Vinci were wrong to take the polarised stance which they did on this subject?

Do you think it's possible they had a deep knowledge of Hermetic principles which in turn guided them to their conclusions?

Sorry to be brief but I'm on my lunch break. I'll do my best to answer your questions this evening.

[Lancelot]

Thanks Akasha.

I think any polarity is a denial on some level that there is only one and that everything is connected. Of course their will always be differences of opinion and open discussion of these differences can only lead to learning.

I do look forward to learning the reasons behind the stance that Pythagoras, Einstein and Da Vinci took on this issue.

I should also probably get some work done this afternoon
:)

[Abhaya]

I think akasha is doing a great job keeping this topic from turning this topic into the mess is sometimes becomes. I like the point nanoo brought up how we are living in a 3d reality but are now understanding and striving towards "5d" ethics and morals. While we may not be able to live up to these ethics perfectly we can at least try to be as non violent as we can. And while everything is living certain beings experiance higher amounts of fear and pain then others. So to kill those with limited activity in these areas is for sure a good start. It's really a knowledge we all have in our hearts. If u have a garden fully stocked to your right and some friendly barn yard animals and a butchers knife on your left and you can go left then something is wrong.

[bram]

When I first posted on here about the benefits of a vegetarian diet, I was, in my innocence, quite shocked and taken aback by the torrent of abuse and hatred that came my way from those Avalonians with a strong attachment to the devouring of corpses. I was accused, among other things, of trying to divide a happy family, of being a fascist, and of being an agent of some illusory PTB. It was almost as if I was asking proud Americans to surrender their guns. I stopped posting altogether, thinking that this forum must be populated by deranged barbarians, and it wasn’t until later, through my meditation, that I came to understand this strange and unhealthy attachment a little better, and saw that it is simply the natural unfolding of karma.

Firstly, consider the statement that we are what we eat. The kalapas, or cells that make up our gross physical body are in a state of constant flux, and are constantly being replaced. All the time, we absorb energy from the air we breathe, and we absorb physical matter from the liquids we drink and the food we eat. We are in fact entirely made up of the things we put into our bodies. We are quite literally what we eat.
The animals we devour are mostly peaceful grazing animals; when they are brought together for slaughter they experience extreme fear, along with hatred and loathing for their murderers. Don’t for an instant think that they forgive you, why would they? We can assume that every strong negative emotion is present in them at the time we kill them, or pay somebody else to kill them for us. Close your eyes and imagine for a moment that you are being restrained and are being helplessly put to a painful, hopeless and agonizing death by a vastly superior life form. How do you feel?

Along with all that negativity, they begin to decay and are taken over immediately by a host of parasitic organisms which begin to quickly absorb them and of course to defecate inside the corpses. Along with the flesh and blood, this is what we eat. Fear, anger, hatred, loathing and decay (along with the hormones and antibiotics). So it’s not really surprising that these characteristics come to represent the attachment to this bad habit, or begin to dominate the minds of carnivores, to be projected outwards at anybody who threatens this strange attachment.

Arguments about what we are evolved to eat are neither here nor there; we are continuing to evolve, and we evolve beyond devouring corpses. Arguments that eating plants is the same as eating meat are wrong on so many levels that I will not even begin to address it here, and arguments that we cannot be healthy without this blood and pus and poison in our systems are dismissably weak. Take a look at a stallion, with his diet of grass. Half the population of the world survives with little or no meat in its diet, either through choice or necessity, but you are so special you can’t?

Nobody is judging you here, you are free to continue eating meat and believing that you are enjoying it, that it is ‘good for you’, or making excuses to justify continuing with the habit. I once believed I couldn’t stop smoking. But we should all be aware that every action has inescapable consequences without fail, and that these consequences themselves lead to further consequences on and on until somebody puts a stop to the cycle of karma. Killing an animal is a serious matter, it causes extreme suffering to a sentient being and it will have dire consequences. Every year we kill billions and billions of animals to feed ourselves, so there are lots and lots of available sheep, cow and pig embryos for you to reincarnate into. Without intervention when you are on the human side of this cycle, you might go on for many lifetimes changing from animal to human and back, butchering and being butchered.

[WhiteFeather]

I have been living a vegetarian and meatless diet since my awakening in 2009. (Jokingly) I think the animals, birds and fish like me a little bit more now.

If anything,,,,,my life has been quite more peaceful and easier since. And i enjoy nature more than ever.

PS. I dont get acid reflux anymore either. ;)

[Akasha]

.....I do look forward to learning the reasons behind the stance that Pythagoras, Einstein and Da Vinci took on this issue....

So would I, haha.

But seriously, from the homepage of Rosecrosshgrc.com (http://www.rosecrossohgrc.com/theorder.html) (Website for the Rosicrucian Order):


In ancient times, when Egyptian civilization was at its height and Egypt was the world’s center of learning, there existed a secret body of teachings called The Mysteries. Considered sacred, these were taught in the mystery schools, where only the most worthy and qualified were admitted.

Through the centuries, these teachings were preserved and taught by the prophets (including Moses, Enoch, Abraham, Solomon and Jesus) and philosopher –sages (Hermes Trismegistus, Amenhotep IV, Socrates). Always, they were taught only to those who were deemed ready and capable of comprehending the philosophical, metaphysical and scientific ideas embodied in the teachings.

In time, the teachings came in the possession of many rulers, thinkers and men of science (Pythagoras, Paracelsus, Emperor Napoleon, Count Saint-Germain, Rene Descartes, Isaac Newton, Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson). In carefully studying and applying the teachings, these men were able to live extraordinary lives and make outstanding achievements in their respective fields.

and.....at the bottom of the homepage is the following:


FAMOUS HERMETICISTS

The following list enumerates a few of the world’s most famous Kabbalists, Martinists, Rosicrucians, Alchemists or Theurgists who have made important contributions in various fields: Albert Einstein, Albertus Magnus, Benjamin Franklin, Jose Rizal, Count Caglistro, Dante Alighieri, Dr. John Dalton, Dr. John Dee, Emilio Aguinaldo, Helena P. Blavatsky, Isaac Newton, Jacob Boehme, Johann Wolfgang von Goethe, Michael Faraday, Robert Boyle, Pythagoras, Emilio Jacinto, Rene Descartes, Nicholas Flamel, Apolinario Mabini, Paracelsus, Roger Bacon, Sir Christopher Wren, Thomas Aquinas, Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Vaughan, William Blake, William Shakespeare, Napoleon Bonaparte, Juan Luna, Robert Boyle etc.

Not entirely sure as to the validity of the statement, but it does tie the Pythagoras, Da Vinci and Einstein together under the hermetic banner.

I've just downloaded The Corpus Hermeticum (http://www.hermetics.org/pdf/anotherhermeticum.pdf) and will read it cover to cover before attempting to elaborate on what I hinted at earlier. Sorry for being a slacker. It's been a long week!

[Akasha]

In light of the Brand new wave currently resonating through the zeitgeist and PA, I (too) thought I would take advantage of the momentum of the Brandwagon in some small way with regards to this thread so here goes:


…How we treat the vulnerable is how we define ourselves as a species…

Russell Brand (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russell_Brand) on the subject of vegetarianism

...whilst in conversation with Morrissey (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Morrissey), who in the same chat said:


…It's unpleasant and it's no different from the holocaust…

...on the subject of animal slaughter, as well as...


…protection of animals is just common sense, it's not an intellectual debate…

Russell also points out in the chat that:


...I'm a vegetarian, as you know, in no small part due to awareness raised by you and your music and the stands you have taken...

...so it's probably worth mentioning that Morrissey has been very vocal regarding animal rights throughout his career. His song, "Meat is Murder", written together with guitarist Johnny Marr whilst in the Smiths and released way back in 1985 pulls no punches on the topic.


Meat is Murder - The Smiths

Heifer whines could be human cries
Closer comes the screaming knife
This beautiful creature must die
This beautiful creature must die
A death for no reason
And death for no reason is MURDER

And the flesh you so fancifully fry
Is not succulent, tasty or kind
It's death for no reason
And death for no reason is MURDER


And the calf that you carve with a smile
It is MURDER
And the turkey you festively slice
It is MURDER
Do you know how animals die?


Kitchen aromas aren't very homely
It's not "comforting", cheery or kind
It's sizzling blood and the unholy stench
Of MURDER


It's not "natural", "normal" or kind
The flesh you so fancifully fry
The meat in your mouth
As you savour the flavour
Of MURDER


NO, NO, NO, IT'S MURDER
NO, NO, NO, IT'S MURDER
And who hears when animals cry?

xacRTqk5QFM

Here's Russell and Morrisseys' conversation:

lG5U_fuGKAc

GB5cGosBIHY

AF_XsL8vvhw

It's my own personal opinion that when we have learnt to collectively extend the non-agression principle to our "younger brothers and sisters" as well as each other, we will at last start to see the first rays of dawn of the long, dark night of the human soul..............and not before. Natural law will not have it any other way.

[Snowflower]

When I have tried to be vegetarian, with extreme attention toward a healthy diet, I have become ill and weak. When I eat meat, I feel better. I eat only grass fed beef and home-raised, home-butchered goats, chickens, ducks, and pigs. I own dogs who are carnivores and I purchase meat for them.

Some neighbors are American Buddhists and state that they are not allowed to kill. Anything. In fact, my son was in their home one day and swatted a mosquito on his arm - and he was told that "this is a no-kill zone." But they eat meat that other people kill. That seems like the height of hypocrisy. And I'll bet that they would not stand passively while a wild animal - or human- came at them in kill mode.

A polygraph machine has been used to record emotions from plants. When a tomato is plucked off the plant, the plant cries. When a carrot is pulled out of the ground, it records pain.

Every glass of water (not distilled) has living creatures in it that are consumed alive when a human or animal drinks that water.

All of creation is based on a food supply that is killed and kills.

Would you have us all become breatharians? But, when we inhale, it is possible that we breathe in tiny mites from the air.

[bram]

A polygraph machine has been used to record emotions from plants. When a tomato is plucked off the plant, the plant cries. When a carrot is pulled out of the ground, it records pain.



Polygpraphs don't record sound or pain.

I think we need to be aware that humans are different from animals, and animals are different from plants. It is a great fortune for an apple to be eaten by a human, as it becomes absorbed into a higher life form. It is not a great fortune for an animal to be tortured and killed by a human. So, you don't have to worry so much about your tomatoes and carrots suffering. :)

[Abhaya]

When I have tried to be vegetarian, with extreme attention toward a healthy diet, I have become ill and weak. When I eat meat, I feel better. I eat only grass fed beef and home-raised, home-butchered goats, chickens, ducks, and pigs. I own dogs who are carnivores and I purchase meat for them.

Some neighbors are American Buddhists and state that they are not allowed to kill. Anything. In fact, my son was in their home one day and swatted a mosquito on his arm - and he was told that "this is a no-kill zone." But they eat meat that other people kill. That seems like the height of hypocrisy. And I'll bet that they would not stand passively while a wild animal - or human- came at them in kill mode.

A polygraph machine has been used to record emotions from plants. When a tomato is plucked off the plant, the plant cries. When a carrot is pulled out of the ground, it records pain.

Every glass of water (not distilled) has living creatures in it that are consumed alive when a human or animal drinks that water.

All of creation is based on a food supply that is killed and kills.

Would you have us all become breatharians? But, when we inhale, it is possible that we breathe in tiny mites from the air.

This is a common argument. Plants are alive. And can feel "some degree of pain". And yes we have to kill to live. However people are mistaken when they take the above fact as a write off to no longer have think about what they consume since you have to kill and all killing is the same. I guess that's the route some people go. I would argue however that there are verying degrees of violence we can choose to allow and imbibe in our daily lives. While there may be tests that show plants release some molecules or hormones remenisint to pain when put under the most high tech microscopes, we don't need said highly advance technological tools to see the pain suffering and terror a cow feels when slaughtered. That's because the suffering experienced is categorically different. HUGELY obviously different. And the violence is unquestionably greater. And while slitting an animals throat your self after giving it a decent life is better then consuming slaughter house meat, You are still choosing a path that is far more violent then other viable options. What that results in on your path I cannot say. And while I would vehemently disagree with those who say they cannot thrive on a plant based diet. If you need animal proteins there are ways to even get them with out killing. Eggs, the fruit of the chicken for one example. I have neighbors with free range chickens who sell the eggs cheaper then the gmo stuff at the store. I would also say milk, but would not personally buy any store milk as the dairy industry is as cruel if not more cruel then the slaughter house industry. However raw milk from a local farm is a decent option.

I am actually trying the 80/10/10 raw diet as advised in the book of the same title by Douglas graham. I have never felt more alert happy and just healthy in all my life. You can visit his site foodnsport.com for amazing testimonials from people who have followed this program for years and decades. Including the founder dr graham who at the age of 60+ is a trainer for professional athletes. And current frequent endurance event champion (competing against 20 year olds). Just to give a reminder that there are many countless examples of people who follow "nutritionally balanced" vegetarian diets and thrive often in another league from those who follow even "healthy" versions of the standard American diet. It is my belief that those who experience poor energy or other ill effects from a vegetarian diet should study a little to learn what they need to include in the diet to thrive. I have personally been a vegetarian for 10 years and while being older then my 3 brothers people we meet when together think I am the youngest. Not trying to brag just want to make it clear that success is possible on a vegetarian diet. As one final disclaimer if you in fact have a medical issue forcing you to eat meat. Then that's just tough. You can only do what you can do though. I think we just need to try our best to be as least violent as we reasonably can.

[Akasha]

Thanks for your response, Snowflower.

For me, it's about existing whilst imposing only on the lowest forms of consciousness I possibly can and keeping any suffering that results to an absolute minimum. It's clear from your attempts at being vegetarian as well as purchasing "ethical" meat that you do too.

The notion that a tomato plant "cries" is potentially somewhat misleading though. There may well be a response which we are at liberty to "interpret" as crying, but when sophisticated technology has to be employed to translate such responses into language we "understand", I'm not sure I'm entirely convinced.

On the other side of the coin, if the interpretations of such tests are valid, I am still at a loss as to how that justifies carnism.

Also, and rather obviously, tomatoes contain seeds which animals are drawn to, consume and then excrete in order that the plant may be reseeded.
All fruit consumption falls under the symbiotic banner and eating seeds, beans and legumes does not threaten the existence of the plant that bore them either.

Regarding bacteria in water which is what I think you meant, bacteria of all kinds live quite happily within our bodies forging all manner of symbiotic relationships with us as a result, many of which are extremely vital. For example, the bacteria responsible for the production of vitamin B12 will happily reside in one's mouth if it remains sufficiently alkaline.
Consumption of animal products only serves to threaten the existence of many of these bacteria due to the increased acidic environment created as result.

Regarding your dogs, it's now been well established that vegan dogs consistently outlive those fed on animal products, in some cases by as much as 10 years, making the inevitable arthritic symptoms of canine old age a thing of the past but it obviously requires planning and thought well beyond the simple purchase of a tray of chum every couple of weeks.

I would respectfully encourage you to read the rest of the thread from the beginning. Many of your points have already been addressed by folk far more eloquent than I.

I would also appreciate it if we could draw this conversation back to the thread title. Would you care comment on that?

In other words, if Einstein et al were right, shouldn't we be pursuing the issue even if it encroaches on our health. After all, there's not much more unhealthy than say, war unless one is of Kissinger's ilk, that is.

[Akasha]

bump bump bump

[greybeard]

Yes Yes Yes.

[DeDukshyn]

For me, getting to the state of eating responsibly and sustainably grown / produced / raised food, is number 1,2, and 3 of things that need to be done. When this is done, many people will have a new view and many will convert to vegetarianism -- it will come as a result of first doing what is needed.

We'll likely never convert Inuit - a whole society of people that live in connection with the Earth and use animals as most of their resources - simply because veggies are hard to grow in 2 months of summer season. But I don't think these people need changing, they know and fully respect responsible sustainability, and they don't really "farm" meat at all, they are given what the earth has chosen for them to have -- like lions are given their food, and all other God created creatures who need to eat meat because their bodies are designed to do so. BTW humans are designed to have meat eating abilities - We all have omnivorous teeth and digestive tracts.

So my goal is to get the message out to the masses about how our food "lifestyles" are destroying very real and tangible things (our health, our earth, etc) -- most people truly are not yet even at this stage.

It'll be a natural evolution -- becoming less reliant on cruder energies (meat) for sustenance, then to even becoming less reliant on that crude but slightly finer energy (plants), and eventually to connect to Life itself for sustenance rather than have to consume Life. There is only one Life -- it just animates different forms - plants and animals.

I see vegetarianism as not an end game - but yet another stepping stone - as meat eating has been a stepping stone for humanity to be able to survive particularly harsh times on planet earth (during ice ages, etc.), but which has now been badly abused in the name of profit and various ways of control by fear.

My 2 cents ;) One step at a time ;)

[TargeT]

We'll likely never convert Inuit - a whole society of people that live in connection with the Earth and use animals as most of their resources

maybe historically, unfortunately now that they get "free money" via the native corporations and have been locked into single villages and no longer are semi-nomadic going from fishing camps to hunting camps any longer... a disturbing amount of the Inuit (and various other tribes) in Alaska have been reduced to violent, incestuous, rapist, domestic abusers with serious alcohol problems.

This does not mean all, there are a small few that cling to the old ways, and a few that have made very well for themselves in modern industry as well.. but as a whole the majority of the old life styles and methods have been shattered worse than the native Americans in the lower 48 were (mostly due to the rapid onset of problems, when compared).


as for veggie vrs carnie; well what you want to happen wont, until there is a good, bio-available source of protein to replace meat with.

And no matter what you've read, there just isn't a protein replacement yet.

[CD7]

yes..........

[Akasha]

And no matter what you've read, there just isn't a protein replacement yet.

Broadened our skill-set to include nutritionist have we, TargeT? :p

I think Mac Danzig (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_Danzig) might disagree with you on that one…..and he's vegan so it's not even as if he's sneaking in the whey protein on the sly.

I thought there was an extremely bio-available source of protein but it's primarily being fed to beef cattle. This second-hand consumption of plant-based protein isn't exactly efficient is it?

[Akasha]

My 2 cents ;) One step at a time ;)

Can't say fairer than that, D. It took a decade on the vegetarian diet before I managed to go vegan (and three decades just to go veggie!!)

I agree about the carnivorous stepping stone as well and each to his/her own according to their environment too, although if I couldn't live somewhere without being carnivorous, I'd move - period. For me, maintaining the non-aggression principle would always take precedence over my location. I accept that some folk aren't graced with that privilege though and maybe karma would be sympathetic in such cases, who knows?

edit: although judging by what TargeT just shared about the demise of the Inuit, maybe not.

[TargeT]

And no matter what you've read, there just isn't a protein replacement yet.

Broadened our skill-set to include nutritionist have we, TargeT? :p

I think Mac Danzig (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_Danzig) might disagree with you on that one…..and he's vegan so it's not even as if he's sneaking in the whey protein on the sly.

I thought there was an extremely bio-available source of protein but it's primarily being fed to beef cattle. This second-hand consumption of plant-based protein isn't exactly efficient is it?

Actually yes, I've been quite interested in nutrition for a few years now; specifically the logic based methods similar to Paleo (though there are more appropriate names Primal diet fits better).

You can show me one or two individuals who metabolize plant protein well, but the majority of vegans do not; every human is different and for the majority animal based protein is just more bio available, the fat source is also superior to plants (though plants also offer amazing fats in the form of monounsaturated fat, just not in the same quantity)

I'm not trying to convert anyone, since veganism is mostly an "ism" and very ideological based; do what you feel is best.

But if you look at the results of eating and you compare a vegan diet to a paleo diet, you almost wonder why anyone would choose veganism (aside from the ideological constructs).

if you care to fully explore this topic (nutrition) and stray from your ideological convictions (in research only, at least) look at this site: http://www.marksdailyapple.com/ and the thousands of examples on the forums of people who turn out like Mac Danzig by following the Primal lifestyle.

Of course this will go places someone who is vegan never would venture... Eating raw, raw everything, raw meat, raw veggies.. it's a very interesting, logical and amazing philosophy like approach to diet and exercise that elicits surprisingly consistent results that are not found in a plant only diet.

[RMorgan]

Well...I can only talk for myself about this issue.

I don't eat any animals for quite a while, 11 years now.

I have great muscle development. I lift weight and I ride my single speed road bicycle. So far, no problems regarding the lack of strength, muscle development and physical conditioning.

I'm not taking any supplements currently, except for Vitamin C and extra minerals. I'm not obsessive about having a super balanced diet either.

So, for me, a vegetarian diet works pretty well. I can't speak for others, though...If it works for me, it wouldn't necessarily work for everyone else, but I'm sure it would work for some as well.

Anyway, we don't really want to go into this discussion again, do we? It's boring...

Raf.

[dianna]

I am a vegetarian, however, I do not feel I treat people any differently than I did when I was a carnivore; Personally, I do not feel, in this day and age it is necessary to kill to survive (indigenous cultures exempt); further, I come from a long line of hunters and gun owners, who, in my opinion, are some of the most empathic, respectful, kind and environmentally responsible persons I have ever met --- Now that being said, I have met some god awful, self righteous vegans and vegetarians, no further "enlightened" (whatever that condescending term means) than the average person --- and whom I would not trust to babysit my cats LOL

[Lancelot]

Another thread on veganism always guaranteed to bring the drum bangers out!

I do think it effects how we treat each other. Particularly relevant to this question is how those who believe that they are superior to everyone else because they don't eat meat treat those who do. Personally I eat meat once a week and always free range, from a local farmer who treats his animals well- these animals wouldn't exist if they weren't reared by the farmer. I believe its all about intention and I do think there is a point to be made how on the mass production and slaughter of animals effects the planet on a vibrational level.

This whole issue poses a few questions-

Is it ok for animals to eat other animals? Carnivorous animals such as Lions and Dogs do not eat vegetables- how does the strict veggie feel about this fact? Should these animals be forced to eat vegetables against their nature?

Is it ok to kill Trees and plants? The same argument for killing living animals could be used to argue that no living thing should be killed for human consumption?

many thanks and with respect to all living beings

[Abhaya]

Another thread on veganism always guaranteed to bring the drum bangers out!

I do think it effects how we treat each other. Particularly relevant to this question is how those who believe that they are superior to everyone else because they don't eat meat treat those who do. Personally I eat meat once a week and always free range, from a local farmer who treats his animals well- these animals wouldn't exist if they weren't reared by the farmer. I believe its all about intention and I do think there is a point to be made how on the mass production and slaughter of animals effects the planet on a vibrational level.

This whole issue poses a few questions-

Is it ok for animals to eat other animals? Carnivorous animals such as Lions and Dogs do not eat vegetables- how does the strict veggie feel about this fact? Should these animals be forced to eat vegetables against their nature?

Is it ok to kill Trees and plants? The same argument for killing living animals could be used to argue that no living thing should be killed for human consumption?

many thanks and with respect to all living beings

As these same arguments were just brought forth on the same page of this thread already I will refer you to posts 45 and 46. Which respond to them.

Also target these dudes will likely disagree with ur wilt away veggie theory. They are actually long time followers of the 80/10/10 raw vegan diet. :p

ucHEVNX2c9o

[Abhaya]

I'd also like to bring forward an intersting point which gives great evidence against the need for insane amounts of protein. There is no time in life when our protein needs and growth rates are higher then when we are infants. And when we are infants we live of off breast milk. Which provides only 6 percent of total calories from protein! 6%! So we have all at one time been on a long term diet where we consumed only 6 percent of our total calories as protein. And we have never put on new tissue faster then during that period during any other part of our lives. So think about that next time you buy a 40 dollar tank of protein powder :p . I'm sorry to tell you but the suggested fat and protein requirements put out by the FDA are bought and paid for by the death camp slaughter and dairy industries that pay them off.

[Abhaya]

Apologies Lancelot i missed a new question you did bring up.

In regards to expecting lions and tigers to eat veggies. There is no sane vegetarian who would think that way. First of all these animals are evolved to eat raw meat. Their large intestines are a fraction the length of ours in order to avoid the putrefaction that would result from rotten meat sitting in the digestive track for any length of time(red meat one of the leading causes of colon cancer) Unlike our intestine which are, of course almost identical to apes, and much longer. Apes which eat an almost completely fruit nut and plant based diet. ( by the way did u know a chimp manages to be 5 times as strong as the average person on such a diet?) . And yeah yeah we have all seen the crazy rare footage of apes consuming meat but this is far from their staple diet. And in my opinion the rare times when an ape chooses to eat meat shows their similarity to us in that they can choose what to eat. They can get caught up in a territorial frenzy and hunt kill and eat a smaller monkey. Just as we can choose to not be fooled by modern society's FDA approved normal diet, and choose a less violent path.

Lions and tigers don't get to choose. And by the way I'd like to see you eat meat with out first cooking, broiling, boiling, or charing it to the extend that its normal molecular structure is completely altered from anything nature would produce. And skip all the seasonings and salts which is the real taste in most meat dishes anyway.

Instead stick to more of the foods nature intended for us, fruits are one of the few foods that are perfect for humans in their natural unadulterated, right from the tree form. If there is any food we are evolved to eat that's it. No science, flames, boiling, salting, curing, or (murdering) required to make it edible. Be like monkeys! Minus the territorial frenzies :p

[Akasha]

Another thread on veganism always guaranteed to bring the drum bangers out!

I do think it effects how we treat each other. Particularly relevant to this question is how those who believe that they are superior to everyone else because they don't eat meat treat those who do. Personally I eat meat once a week and always free range, from a local farmer who treats his animals well- these animals wouldn't exist if they weren't reared by the farmer. I believe its all about intention and I do think there is a point to be made how on the mass production and slaughter of animals effects the planet on a vibrational level.

This whole issue poses a few questions-

Is it ok for animals to eat other animals? Carnivorous animals such as Lions and Dogs do not eat vegetables- how does the strict veggie feel about this fact? Should these animals be forced to eat vegetables against their nature?

Is it ok to kill Trees and plants? The same argument for killing living animals could be used to argue that no living thing should be killed for human consumption?

many thanks and with respect to all living beings

Hey Lancelot. Thanks for your input. We are all trying really hard not to bang any drums too loudly, but there's no harm in a little percussion jam, hey?

I think it's fair to say that Abhaya has covered most of your points or referenced appropriate posts which serve that purpose, although I would like to respond to your point about your local farmer providing his livestock with the opportunity to live by saying that I, personally, would choose nonexistence over that existence, no matter how green the grass was, but that's just me.

[Akasha]

And no matter what you've read, there just isn't a protein replacement yet.

Broadened our skill-set to include nutritionist have we, TargeT? :p

I think Mac Danzig (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_Danzig) might disagree with you on that one…..and he's vegan so it's not even as if he's sneaking in the whey protein on the sly.

I thought there was an extremely bio-available source of protein but it's primarily being fed to beef cattle. This second-hand consumption of plant-based protein isn't exactly efficient is it?

Actually yes, I've been quite interested in nutrition for a few years now; specifically the logic based methods similar to Paleo (though there are more appropriate names Primal diet fits better).

You can show me one or two individuals who metabolize plant protein well, but the majority of vegans do not; every human is different and for the majority animal based protein is just more bio available, the fat source is also superior to plants (though plants also offer amazing fats in the form of monounsaturated fat, just not in the same quantity)

I'm not trying to convert anyone, since veganism is mostly an "ism" and very ideological based; do what you feel is best.

But if you look at the results of eating and you compare a vegan diet to a paleo diet, you almost wonder why anyone would choose veganism (aside from the ideological constructs).

if you care to fully explore this topic (nutrition) and stray from your ideological convictions (in research only, at least) look at this site: http://www.marksdailyapple.com/ and the thousands of examples on the forums of people who turn out like Mac Danzig by following the Primal lifestyle.

Of course this will go places someone who is vegan never would venture... Eating raw, raw everything, raw meat, raw veggies.. it's a very interesting, logical and amazing philosophy like approach to diet and exercise that elicits surprisingly consistent results that are not found in a plant only diet.

There's a lot I would like to debate within the above post, TargeT, but I think we're getting off topic. It might not be a bad idea for you to start a paleo/primal vs plant thread. I'm sure there'd be a great deal of valuable mileage in it and as I'm sure you've gathered by now, I'd be more than happy to contribute.

For the time being, though, I really want to try and keep this thread on-topic. Of course if you can tie in the paleo concept into the OP of this thread then great, go for it!

[DeDukshyn]

Apologies Lancelot i missed a new question you did bring up.

In regards to expecting lions and tigers to eat veggies. There is no sane vegetarian who would think that way. First of all these animals are evolved to eat raw meat. Their large intestines are a fraction the length of ours in order to avoid the putrefaction that would result from rotten meat sitting in the digestive track for any length of time(red meat one of the leading causes of colon cancer) Unlike our intestine which are, of course almost identical to apes, and much longer. Apes which eat an almost completely fruit nut and plant based diet. ( by the way did u know a chimp manages to be 5 times as strong as the average person on such a diet?) . And yeah yeah we have all seen the crazy rare footage of apes consuming meat but this is far from their staple diet. And in my opinion the rare times when an ape chooses to eat meat shows their similarity to us in that they can choose what to eat. They can get caught up in a territorial frenzy and hunt kill and eat a smaller monkey. Just as we can choose to not be fooled by modern society's FDA approved normal diet, and choose a less violent path.

Lions and tigers don't get to choose. And by the way I'd like to see you eat meat with out first cooking, broiling, boiling, or charing it to the extend that its normal molecular structure is completely altered from anything nature would produce. And skip all the seasonings and salts which is the real taste in most meat dishes anyway.

Instead stick to more of the foods nature intended for us, fruits are one of the few foods that are perfect for humans in their natural unadulterated, right from the tree form. If there is any food we are evolved to eat that's it. No science, flames, boiling, salting, curing, or (murdering) required to make it edible. Be like monkeys! Minus the territorial frenzies :p




"Apes which eat an almost completely fruit nut and plant based diet."
I know little about chimps, but here's an article that indicates a little contrary to your post ... But yeah they certainly are stronger pound for pound than the average human -- that is for sure.



research in this week’s Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences now confirms that adult male chimps regularly eat meat - See more at: http://firstlook.pnas.org/adult-male-chimps-regularly-eat-meat-unlike-other-chimps/#sthash.KaUIOhZp.dpuf

Seems a bit more than territorial frenzy, not trying to argue with the overall theme -- just getting to the details ... maybe don't be too "apey" afterall :P

[DeDukshyn]

And no matter what you've read, there just isn't a protein replacement yet.

Broadened our skill-set to include nutritionist have we, TargeT? :p

I think Mac Danzig (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mac_Danzig) might disagree with you on that one…..and he's vegan so it's not even as if he's sneaking in the whey protein on the sly.

I thought there was an extremely bio-available source of protein but it's primarily being fed to beef cattle. This second-hand consumption of plant-based protein isn't exactly efficient is it?

What you say here may not be obvious to many -- perhaps you should elaborate? ;) (this is a hot topic for me the same - even though I'm not a full vegetarian - still a concern) An this is the same reason the majority SA rainforests are being cleared and burned ... If you are not vegetarian -- this is important info ...

[Abhaya]

Apologies Lancelot i missed a new question you did bring up.

In regards to expecting lions and tigers to eat veggies. There is no sane vegetarian who would think that way. First of all these animals are evolved to eat raw meat. Their large intestines are a fraction the length of ours in order to avoid the putrefaction that would result from rotten meat sitting in the digestive track for any length of time(red meat one of the leading causes of colon cancer) Unlike our intestine which are, of course almost identical to apes, and much longer. Apes which eat an almost completely fruit nut and plant based diet. ( by the way did u know a chimp manages to be 5 times as strong as the average person on such a diet?) . And yeah yeah we have all seen the crazy rare footage of apes consuming meat but this is far from their staple diet. And in my opinion the rare times when an ape chooses to eat meat shows their similarity to us in that they can choose what to eat. They can get caught up in a territorial frenzy and hunt kill and eat a smaller monkey. Just as we can choose to not be fooled by modern society's FDA approved normal diet, and choose a less violent path.

Lions and tigers don't get to choose. And by the way I'd like to see you eat meat with out first cooking, broiling, boiling, or charing it to the extend that its normal molecular structure is completely altered from anything nature would produce. And skip all the seasonings and salts which is the real taste in most meat dishes anyway.

Instead stick to more of the foods nature intended for us, fruits are one of the few foods that are perfect for humans in their natural unadulterated, right from the tree form. If there is any food we are evolved to eat that's it. No science, flames, boiling, salting, curing, or (murdering) required to make it edible. Be like monkeys! Minus the territorial frenzies :p




"Apes which eat an almost completely fruit nut and plant based diet."
I know little about chimps, but here's an article that indicates a little contrary to your post ... But yeah they certainly are stronger pound for pound than the average human -- that is for sure.



research in this week’s Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences now confirms that adult male chimps regularly eat meat - See more at: http://firstlook.pnas.org/adult-male-chimps-regularly-eat-meat-unlike-other-chimps/#sthash.KaUIOhZp.dpuf

Seems a bit more than territorial frenzy, not trying to argue with the overall theme -- just getting to the details ... maybe don't be too "apey" afterall :P


Nice find. There are varying opinions on how much meat chimps eat. In jane Goodall's observations she found that meat consisted of on average 2% or less of the chimps diet. Also the rare hunts are always carried out by the males. And the males are also usually the only to partake in the meat eating. Although they sometimes do share with the females. No other great ape has ever been found to eat meat. Gorillas, orangoutangs. IMO the fact that male chimps ,being the smartest, and most free thinking of the apes, choose to on occasion eat meat, which is for certain the smallest part of their diet, is an example of a being like us which can choose its diet based on other factors then what nature has intended for them. Some speculate that some chimps simply like the thrill of the hunt. Interesting stuff.

http://www.allaboutwildlife.com/what-do-chimps-eat

[DeDukshyn]

...




"Apes which eat an almost completely fruit nut and plant based diet."
I know little about chimps, but here's an article that indicates a little contrary to your post ... But yeah they certainly are stronger pound for pound than the average human -- that is for sure.



research in this week’s Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences now confirms that adult male chimps regularly eat meat - See more at: http://firstlook.pnas.org/adult-male-chimps-regularly-eat-meat-unlike-other-chimps/#sthash.KaUIOhZp.dpuf

Seems a bit more than territorial frenzy, not trying to argue with the overall theme -- just getting to the details ... maybe don't be too "apey" afterall :P


Nice find. There are varying opinions on how much meat chimps eat. In jane Goodall's observations she found that meat consisted of on average 2% or less of the chimps diet. Also the rare hunts are always carried out by the males. And the males are also usually the only to partake in the meat eating. Although they sometimes do share with the females. No other great ape has ever been found to eat meat. Gorillas, orangoutangs. IMO the fact that male chimps ,being the smartest, and most free thinking of the apes, choose to on occasion eat meat, which is for certain the smallest part of their diet, is an example of a being like us which can choose its diet based on other factors then what nature has intended for them. Some speculate that some chimps simply like the thrill of the hunt. Interesting stuff.

http://www.allaboutwildlife.com/what-do-chimps-eat

Some orangs have been witnessed hunting and catching smaller primates -- though oddly, these were observed as females, as opposed to the mostly exclusive male chimps that indulge in meat eating.





"Orangutans have been seen to eat meat only on rare occasions. In Sumatra, three adult females have been observed on seven occasions to hunt and eat slow lorises, and one female was observed to eat a gibbon. At Gunung Palung, a juvenile female orangutan once caught and ate a rat. "
http://people.bu.edu/orang/orangutans.html

At any case, it's mostly the male chimps which may indicate the involvement of "ego" in the desire to eat meat. ;)

[Abhaya]

So let's be less violent then apes to if we can :)

[Akasha]

I thought there was an extremely bio-available source of protein but it's primarily being fed to beef cattle. This second-hand consumption of plant-based protein isn't exactly efficient is it?

What you say here may not be obvious to many -- perhaps you should elaborate? ;) (this is a hot topic for me the same - even though I'm not a full vegetarian - still a concern) An this is the same reason the majority SA rainforests are being cleared and burned ... If you are not vegetarian -- this is important info ...

Hi DeDukshyn,

I was just pointing out (maybe too ambiguously) that soya is being planted at a frightening rate all over the globe, not to satisfy vegans' desire for soya milk and tofu, but as the most cost-effective livestock feed for beef cattle. If the population did become veggie, approximately only 1/6th of that area would be needed to satisfy human soya needs. The rest could be reforested leading towards a balancing out of the CO2 see-saw.....thats all. Even better, such areas could be reforested as tropical fruit forests, with appropriate ecological attention being given to wild-life habitat of course.

[Akasha]

So let's be less violent then apes to if we can :)

Ditto.

Using the most violent aspects of another (lower?) species' behaviour as justification for our own perpetuation of such behaviour doesn't exactly suggest willingness to transcend our current level of collective consciousness.

[DeDukshyn]

I thought there was an extremely bio-available source of protein but it's primarily being fed to beef cattle. This second-hand consumption of plant-based protein isn't exactly efficient is it?

What you say here may not be obvious to many -- perhaps you should elaborate? ;) (this is a hot topic for me the same - even though I'm not a full vegetarian - still a concern) An this is the same reason the majority SA rainforests are being cleared and burned ... If you are not vegetarian -- this is important info ...

Hi DeDukshyn,

I was just pointing out (maybe too ambiguously) that soya is being planted at a frightening rate all over the globe, not to satisfy vegans' desire for soya milk and tofu, but as the most cost-effective livestock feed for beef cattle. If the population did become veggie, approximately only 1/6th of that area would be needed to satisfy human soya needs. The rest could be reforested leading towards a balancing out of the CO2 see-saw.....thats all. Even better, such areas could be reforested as tropical fruit forests, with appropriate ecological attention being given to wild-life habitat of course.

Exactly -- this is a major concern that people content with eating meat from a personal point of view should know and understand. Our rainforests keep the atmosphere clean and balanced, they keep the water in the mountains and hills, thus creating their own climate zones, as opposed to hilly desert - as it will become without the trees. In these climate zones are the majority of all Earth's diversity of life -- the Majority of it. From these places plants and animals have been discovered that has led to most of our modern medicines (and thus many 'drugs" are actually naturally sourced compounds); and there is still so much we don't know about these rainforests, but yet we are willing to just haphazardly destroy them for oil and cattle profits??!

So my point is that eating responsibly is more than a personal choice, it is a global contribution addressing this "axis of evil" (to steal Bush's term ;)) that is bent on destroying our Home for the sake of profit. You can set aside any other reason, for personal beliefs or whatever, but this level of responsibility is actually on each of our shoulders. It's not a problem just "out there" -- it will have huge implications in 50 years if we don't start reversing these trends now.

Most people in temperate climes have no excuse not to grow their own vegetables - except maybe sheer laziness - this addresses half the "land use for food" issues right there -- the solutions to these problems are indeed based around simple individual choices and a little bit of work.

[DeDukshyn]

So let's be less violent then apes to if we can :)

Ditto.

Using the most violent aspects of another (lower?) species' behaviour as justification for our own perpetuation of such behaviour doesn't exactly suggest willingness to transcend our current level of collective consciousness.

Right, but we do need to keep facts straight, or people who know better won't take the issue seriously. ;) "Apes do/don't so we should/shouldn't" isn't exactly a convincing argument anyway on any level ;)

Not sure if I would classify anything "lower" than humans at this point in time though :P (speaking in respect to current state of humans - not necessarily glorifying animals or speaking of human potential)

[Akasha]

....."Apes do/don't so we should/shouldn't" isn't exactly a convincing argument anyway on any level ;).....

'Zacklee!


Not sure if I would classify anything "lower" than humans at this point in time though :P (speaking in respect to current state of humans - not necessarily glorifying animals or speaking of human potential)

Indeed, hence the "?" after "lower".

[lunaflare]

The Domesticator (human) is likely to abuse the domesticated (humans/animals).
I can only speak for the current animals-bred-for-profit-world, as this is what I see today.
Animals suffer the most horribly with this dynamic as they are voiceless and with little to no "rights".
Live export is one of the most abhorrent displays of human behaviour in terms of blatant abuse.
Not saying anything new, I know....but ....
It is a step bringing these issues to light and it is possible to elevate the standard of ethical practice. How different are we from so-called ETs that harvest and control human energy? Not so, I would argue.
Not eating meat or questioning this supposed "need" is a stepping stone to the pattern of domesticator/domesticated. It is a small gesture of exerting some "freedom" from this paradigm. But it is not the sole solution. This matrix runs deep...deeper than I can truly fathom.
Agree with many. Thanks for your thread Akasha...

[GreenGuy]

To answer the question: yes, the way we treat animals has a lot to do with how we treat each other. No, I am not a vegetarian. It's been demonstrated that plants are also sentient beings. Shall we not eat them as well? Is the lion evil because it tears an antelope apart?

The way to understand this issue is to realize that physical life is just an aspect of reality. Every living thing is food for something else. You and I will end up as food for the most primitive of beings: bacteria and worms. It is not the death of other organisms that establishes our spiritual parameters, but cruelty certainly does.

[Abhaya]

I agree it is cruelty that decides. So when an entity is able to live on a plant based diet. And is able to understand the difference in pain and suffering caused by killing a plant vs let's say a cow or sheep. And still chooses to go down the more cruel path. This is when there is problem

¤=[Post Update]=¤

Also note Simons latest advice on diet from his own thread

http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?30323-Simon-Parkes-about-Mantis-Aliens-Reptiles-and-other-aliens.&p=767315&viewfull=1#post767315

[Akasha]

.....It's been demonstrated that plants are also sentient beings. Shall we not eat them as well?.....

Eating fruits, nuts and seeds is the loophole in this argument. As I mentioned in a previous post (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?62855-Does-Our-Treatment-of-Animals-Affect-How-We-Treat-Each-Other&p=751082&viewfull=1#post751082), fruit, nuts and seeds are the symbiotic link between plants and animals.

Technically, root crops, if left to go to seed, will then die off at the end of the season allowing the roots to be harvested without contravention of your argument too. Of course, this isn't carried out in modern agro-business.

I grow my own.

Re' lions/evil, is the lion aware that it is aware? if not, then no.

Best.

[Abhaya]

Actually I am converting back to meat eating. And plan a trip to outback steak house this very night!

I have been swayed by a frankly ground breaking article arguing the failures of veganism.

Here is just one mind blowing revelation from the article.

12. . Many Western Vegans too intensively visit beaches , take sun bath and for other recreational purposes its fact that eggs of many turtles and other reptiles too die during this process. Non vegans have seen vegans enjoying recreational activities on beaches So as per vegan theory how can vegans wear diamonds / visit beaches because of cruelty involved.

Please see the whole article here
http://www.dandavats.com/?p=12063

I think after we all read this we can put an end to all this silly debate

To think of all the reptiles I have crushed playing frisbee on the beach. I need to go eat some turkey legs and put an end to this hypocrisy once and for all.
:p

Sorry bored ;)

[Abhaya]

kUZ1YLhIAg8

With all the talk about cows being able to feel pain and terror.... I thought it was about time we talk about cows feeling joy :)

Watch this short vid of how cows react to getting let out to pasture for the first time after a long winter inside. Reminds me of kids getting let out on the last day of school before summer vacation. :)

Come on u don't want to eat those guys do ya :p

[RMorgan]

Hahahaha...Check this, Abhaya. :)

nTQD7imxd8o

Raf.

[Abhaya]

Haha epic. They are all like "dudes have u ever heard anyone moo like that?!"

[Abhaya]

Went a little off topic on another thread discussing peoples outrage over horse slaughter houses. Think the response is fitting here.

Always amazed how we choose to label some animals as special. After living on a farm in Costa Rica with both cows and horses. I have to say the cow is just as smart if not smarter then your average horse. We decide that they are "companion" animals because they are convenient for us to prance around on, but I have experience bonding with horses and cows and both when raised in a loving way share affection and appreciate a scratch behind the ear just the same. All this is an example of people seeing the shell of the entity and not the consciousness within. Speciesism is the next hurdle for our kind. It sounds as crazy as gay rights did 50 years ago. But this is IMO the biggest leap in seeing real equality that we can take. And we won't be any sort of respectable higher thinking beings until we do. Do u personally feel appalled at the thought of eating a horse, or a dog or a cat for that matter? If u do consider a baby calf is just as playful as ur new kitten. It is a hypocrisy to be ok with one species being bred for slaughter and not a nother. Especially another with equal level of awareness. This might be going to far but this is the same mentality that allowed hitler to set up the camps. When we allow our selves to label certain entities as less then others based on really nothing less then their convienence to us when alive vs dead then this is a nazi mentality. Think about it. Go veggie and separate your self from this garbage.

[Abhaya]

A friend brought this video to my attention. I have to say I agree 10 fold.

M9WcVOaFg-A

Here she is the self proclaimed vegan b*tch.

Defy her if you dare ;)

It's short come on watch it! :p

[TargeT]

Went a little off topic on another thread discussing peoples outrage over horse slaughter houses. Think the response is fitting here.


I replied to that off topic post,, I think it is fitting here also.


Think about it. Go veggie and separate your self from this garbage.

how about we just accept our role in this existence? or does your Speciesism stop at mobile life forms? perhaps its mobilism?

There are many levels that should be considered when choosing how to act and evaluating the intent/motivation behind actions.

for instance, you could realize that we are simply energy condensed into a slow vibration so we (our consciousness that encompass all things) can subjectively experience ourselves, this happens through the interaction of opposition forces (duality.. positive, negative.. male, female.. death, life.. etc..) and a rule set, or "matrix" that our consciousness created for us to play in/with.

if that is your understanding of "reality" (which to me is the only one that makes sense & quantum theory implies this) then your experience of "veganism" is just as valid as my experience of "omnivorism", spending extra energy on one or the other "because they (the ideologies) are convenient for us to prance around on." when we could be changing the experience to a more accepting, positive understanding, that as the highest expression of consciousness (that we for sure know of) and creative force we are responsible for; well that just seems like silly expenditure of consciousness.

...(when eating meat)... I'm thankful that I was able to provide this portion of myself to myself to continue my experience here in this game; I hope it enables me to expand my understanding and continue to refine the small portion of our collective consciousness that is entrusted to my expression of ego (the ME).

this mentality includes compassion for myself (IE what I eat, you, the rocks I walk on, the bugs that bite me... everything) and a (w)HOL(e)ISTIC understanding of existence helps me focus my energy (when I am focused and conscious of my actions, a struggle we all face).


Enjoy your veganism experience, I hope you know its not "the only" one and as long as the intent is positive no experience is wrong.

[Abhaya]

Just came across this IMO amazing article. By Gary Yourofsky. His tone is a little harsh perhaps but the points are razor sharp. He blows away the "but plants feel pain too" argument that is often the meat eaters last ditch defense. Ignore it or address it. Please discuss.


Just came across this IMO amazing article. By Gary Yourofsky. His tone is a little harsh perhaps but the points are razor sharp. He blows away the "but plants feel pain too" argument that is often the meat eaters last ditch defense. Ignore it or address it. Please discuss.

“When meat-eaters run out of excuses to eat dead animals, they usually spew one of two inanities. First, they promulgate respect for the vegan lifestyle, and ask for some respect in return. Of course flesh-eaters respect the vegan way. What’s not to respect? Are we too compassionate, too merciful and too altruistic? Meat-eaters begging for vegan respect is akin to NAMBLA (North American Man Boy Love Association) pedophiles asking people who don’t rape little boys for respect. I don’t respect people who choose cruelty. I don’t respect a pedophile’s choice to molest kids. I don’t respect a rapist’s desire to violate a woman’s body. I don’t respect a thief’s desire to rob banks. I don’t respect a Nazi’s belief that Jews, blacks, gays, etc. are inferior and should be exterminated. I don’t respect lifestyles based on hatred and discrimination.

The second inanity of meat-eaters is attempting to indict the vegan lifestyle by claiming that plants suffer and die to feed the vegans of the world. Yet, I am still searching for People for the Ethical Treatment of Carrots, Last Chance for Broccoli or Apples Deserve Absolute Protection Today and Tomorrow. People for the Ethical Treatment of Carrots doesn’t exist because everyone knows the difference between taking a carrot out of the ground and slicing a pig into pieces. Everyone also knows the difference between mowing a lawn and tossing a live baby male chick (egg industry) into a rendering machine. If one does not understand the difference, then that person is disingenuous, irrational and illogical. The fact that some people compare carrots to cows proves how muck-deep in oppressive thought meat-eaters truly are.
Allow me to explain further how absurd it is to think that plants are akin to animals in any way. My wife recently visited her parents and noticed the 20-year-old cactus in her childhood bedroom wasn’t doing well. After perusing some gardening sites for tips, we CUT the cactus in half and set it out to dry in the sun for three days. We re-planted it with a Dracaena plant and now it is thriving. If you truly believe that plants and animals are one and the same, then cut a human baby in half and see what happens. Better yet, go to your local hospice center and heal them by cutting everyone in half. The truth is that if this website discussed the suffering of carrots and tomatoes, or I gave speeches about cashew cruelty, or I presented footage of people picking apples from a tree and raged about the apple-plucking, you would be laughing your ass off and texting your friends about my insanity.
Even from the meat-eater’s perspective, it’s just illogical to speak of giving rights of freedom and bodily integrity to insentient plants while causing sentient animals to suffer and die by the billion! Plants—unlike animals—are insentient beings void of central nervous systems, lungs, hearts, kidneys, intestines, blood, ears and eyes. They do not defecate or urinate either. Nobody screams in horror when their neighbors are mowing the lawn (grass is a plant, too). But if neighbors were slicing pigs into pieces on the front lawn, there would be tears, physical interventions and the proper authorities would be summoned to stop the bloodshed. Plus, if people honestly believe it’s wrong to eat plants, they could always choose the ultra-vegan lifestyle of fruitarianism (eating the fruits and nuts that fall from trees). From a Judeo-Christian-Islamic perspective, the Garden of Eden was a fruitarian haven. From a physiological angle, humans are actually fruitarians/frugivores (see the HUMANS ARE HERBIVORES section on this page).
The epigrammatic philosopher Voltaire once said, “Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities.” When it comes to pain and suffering, the screams, the blood, the writhing, and the fear that animals exhibit trump the so called “waves” of plants.
But just to show how thoroughly disingenuous this so-called “plant-killing argument” really is, let’s suppose for the moment that the meat-eaters who invoke it really believe that their vegan counterparts cause plants to suffer and die. Even if that were the case, these meat-eaters would be logically committed to switching to veganism right away! If you’ve studied the two sections on animal-based agriculture above, you already know that carnivorous societies destroy many more plants than the vegan ones do. In America, 70 to 80 percent of our corn, wheat, oats and soy are fed to the 10 billion land animals killed annually. Globally, 35 to 65 percent of the world’s plants are fed to 60 billion land animals killed annually. If humans stopped eating animals, fewer plants would be harvested; remember, a single vegan directly consumes about one-tenth of the plant material that is either directly or indirectly consumed by a single carnivorous human. Veganism is still the ONLY solution to this problem, because fewer beings—sentient and insentient—would die if humans, who are physiologically herbivorous anyway, ate plants directly. Even the Council for Science, Technology and Agriculture, a group of animal agriculture people, stated in the early ’90s that all the crops in America could feed every human on this planet twice-over! However, there had to be one stipulation; everyone would have to be vegan!

Sadly, these facts make little or no impression on meat-eaters who seek refuge in the plant-killing argument because they really don’t give a **** about plants any more than they give a **** about the suffering of animals. They’re just groping desperately for yet another lame excuse to eat meat.
Some meat-eaters claim that vegans indirectly kill animals because tractors that harvest crops unintentionally kill some animals. The worldwide premeditated killings of 60 billion land animals in slaughterhouses and 90 billion marine animals in the waterways are diametrically opposed to the accidental tractor-killings in a field. Even our unjust legal system recognizes the difference between a premeditated murder and an accidental killing. Since farmers don’t use their John Deeres to intentionally crush gophers and snakes, you never know when, where, or whether it’s going to happen. Slaughterhouses INTENTIONALLY kill animals for meat-eaters. No one intentionally kills gophers for vegans. I’ve volunteered at SASHA Farm animal sanctuary for over 15 years. When we mowed the hay fields, there were times when a snake or a field mouse ended up in the bales of hay. This never made us intentional killers. It made us people in the 21st century who rely on machines. When we use machines, accidental killings of animals and people will occur. Isn’t it conveniently hypocritical that the meat-eaters who bring up the animal-tractor issue still drive a car or truck, even though those machines kill millions of humans annually worldwide? These accidental killings are okay with meat-eaters because meat-eaters aren’t human-killing addicts. They’re animal-killing addicts. And addicts are the most insane, illogical, excuse-filled people to ever deface this earth. Addicts are ALWAYS irrational when it comes to their habits. Have you ever known an alcoholic, a cigarette smoker or a heroin user to be rational or ethical when it came to alcohol, cigarettes or heroin? Of course not. And there is NO such thing as a rational—or ethical—meat, dairy, and egg-eater when it comes to animal issues and whether humans should be enslaving, murdering and eating animals.
Vegans tread lightly and cause the absolute minimal amount of unintentional suffering to this planet and its inhabitants. Meat-eaters cause the MAXIMUM amount of intentional and unintentional suffering to this planet and its inhabitants because it is unreasonable to intentionally starve millions of humans to death by feeding around 50 percent of the world’s grains to 60 billion land animals, to murder 60 billion land animals and 90 billion marine animals with premeditation, and then accidentally kill wild animals with tractors. With veganism, we could eliminate two problems instead of living with three!


After rereading the article I do feel that this would have been a true master piece if he had simply dialed down the aggression several notches. That being said his points are still impressively accurate and hard hitting. And in a way the aggression may have some use as it is what gets these debates riled up and forces people to again go over their personal rationale, as to what they think is ok to eat.

And actually there is a fine line between making points to judge others. And sincerely believing in what you are saying and thus the passion is directed towards the protection of the animals and devoid of any "I am better then you ego"

Where this author lies in that regard I cannot say but his points hold true.

[TargeT]

After rereading the article I do feel that this would have been a true master piece if he had simply dialed down the aggression several notches.

and perhaps added in some logic and data (facts) other than vegans eating 1/10th the amount of plant matter when compared to "meat eaters".

this belief set is almost scary, the anger seeping out of that makes veganism seem like it can easily twist in to a very dark negative & hateful belief.. that alone turns many many people off to it.

the judgement, the shame blame and guilt... I suppose my shock at this type of behavior is similar to your shock at my brisket dinner lastnight.

I hope all this negativity and animosity doesn't spill TOO many people over into extremist groups ( I mean animal rights terror groups are hilarious, and dangerous at the same time..)

where's the white flag...?

[Abhaya]

Went a little off topic on another thread discussing peoples outrage over horse slaughter houses. Think the response is fitting here.


I replied to that off topic post,, I think it is fitting here also.


Think about it. Go veggie and separate your self from this garbage.

how about we just accept our role in this existence? or does your Speciesism stop at mobile life forms? perhaps its mobilism?

There are many levels that should be considered when choosing how to act and evaluating the intent/motivation behind actions.

for instance, you could realize that we are simply energy condensed into a slow vibration so we (our consciousness that encompass all things) can subjectively experience ourselves, this happens through the interaction of opposition forces (duality.. positive, negative.. male, female.. death, life.. etc..) and a rule set, or "matrix" that our consciousness created for us to play in/with.

if that is your understanding of "reality" (which to me is the only one that makes sense & quantum theory implies this) then your experience of "veganism" is just as valid as my experience of "omnivorism", spending extra energy on one or the other "because they (the ideologies) are convenient for us to prance around on." when we could be changing the experience to a more accepting, positive understanding, that as the highest expression of consciousness (that we for sure know of) and creative force we are responsible for; well that just seems like silly expenditure of consciousness.

...(when eating meat)... I'm thankful that I was able to provide this portion of myself to myself to continue my experience here in this game; I hope it enables me to expand my understanding and continue to refine the small portion of our collective consciousness that is entrusted to my expression of ego (the ME).

this mentality includes compassion for myself (IE what I eat, you, the rocks I walk on, the bugs that bite me... everything) and a (w)HOL(e)ISTIC understanding of existence helps me focus my energy (when I am focused and conscious of my actions, a struggle we all face).


Enjoy your veganism experience, I hope you know its not "the only" one and as long as the intent is positive no experience is wrong.

As for not including plants in speciesism. See the article I just posted

As for boiling all experience down to energy waves.... While I agree to a large level with that being an aspect of reality, to take said thinking to far is quite dangerous. For instance then we could make a case for cannibalism being acceptable too. If we apply said logic to sex life then, could we not say the sexual desires of a pedofile are simply another energy pattern that when thought about right can be embraced as well. When played out to its limit it paves the way for chaos.

You say you look at your stake dinner as something which allows you continue on. There are ways to "continue on" which cause far less pain and suffering.......

[Abhaya]

After rereading the article I do feel that this would have been a true master piece if he had simply dialed down the aggression several notches.

and perhaps added in some logic and data (facts) other than vegans eating 1/10th the amount of plant matter when compared to "meat eaters".

this belief set is almost scary, the anger seeping out of that makes veganism seem like it can easily twist in to a very dark negative & hateful belief.. that alone turns many many people off to it.

the judgement, the shame blame and guilt... I suppose my shock at this type of behavior is similar to your shock at my brisket dinner lastnight.

I hope all this negativity and animosity doesn't spill TOO many people over into extremist groups ( I mean animal rights terror groups are hilarious, and dangerous at the same time..)

where's the white flag...?

Again there is fine line between hatred and justified anger. If a animal rights activist truly feels for the animals plight and are begging, pleading, for their safety, and angry about it to then there is no fault. If the activist see's meat eaters as being less worth then any one else then they violate their own philosophy.

Question when the holocaust was going on, do you think it would have been apt to discuss in PC chat rooms while we are careful to respect the murderous desires of gas chamber sergeants. No you should get mad and stand up. Picketing would not be enough even.

As for the white flag, if you find it there are some kind entities in the slaughter houses ready to wave the hell out of that thing.

[TargeT]

As for not including plants in speciesism. See the article I just posted

it was terrible? just because you don't see a "save the carrot" society doesn't mean a damn thing... there wasn't a "save the jews" society during the holocaust, that logic is well.. there is no logic really.



As for boiling all experience down to energy waves.... While I agree to a large level with that being an aspect of reality, to take said thinking to far is quite dangerous. For instance then we could make a case for cannibalism being acceptable too. If we apply said logic to sex life then, could we not say the sexual desires of a pedofile are simply another energy pattern that when thought about right can be embraced as well. When played out to its limit it paves the way for chaos.

Cannibalism is socially unacceptable, just like eating dogs is in america; but it is practiced in other parts of the world ( just like eating dogs). The next step in this discussion leads to a quantifiable topic.

Which life is "worth more" than another? clearly vegans do not care about plant life, I'd guess insect life is also not cared for? how about reptiles, do they count or are they in kind of a grey fuzzy area? is it only mammals that we are concerned with? which life meets the cut off point (if you are going to set one)? this is where your cannibalism argument goes...

as for pedophile, that ignores a very key point of my short writing.. intent.

if the intent is for good, pedophilia does not have a place, and is completely irrelevant to the argument. Trying to prove a point by bring up extremes is a very common tactic, its more exciting and extremes (duality) is the bread and butter of existence so its understandable; but its still not applicable.



Again there is fine line between hatred and justified anger

fighting fire with fire burns the whole world down.


anger (aka fear, the dark side of emotion) is the wrong side, come into the light!

[RMorgan]

Very good article, Abhaya.

The guy sounds a little bit harsh indeed, but I understand him to a certain point.

Long term vegetarians know a lot about receiving gratuitous violence from meet eaters... I've had people wanting to punch me in the face just because I'm a vegetarian; Really, even if you don't say a word about it, some people become completely out of their minds just to know that you don't eat meat.

Anyway, people will invariably do everything they can to defend whatever they've grown up believing to be right, independently of logic and reason.

If you're not a very balanced person, this violence can affect you negatively. I believe that's the case with this guy.

It's really a challenge to remain calm and cool when your opposition is often very violent and angry.

Obviously, this "you're murdering plants too" argument is completely flawed and can be easily refuted from several different angles...In fact, I'm yet to hear a meat eating argument that can't be logically refuted, but I'm not into this game anymore...It's kind of pointless

Anyway, logically speaking, the only truly solid argument a meat eater can use to defend his habit is to say that he eats meat because he likes it. It's as simple as that. Broadly speaking, people are free to choose what to do with their lives, and whatever choices they make are sovereign and legitimate. This doesn't mean there aren't consequences for each choice, of course.

At this point, it's impossible not to admit that the vegetarian diet has much more pros than cons...It's good for the planet, it doesn't involve suffering, cruelty and brutality and it's very beneficial for health if conducted properly...The only point against vegetarianism that I can think about is that some people are not really compatible with this diet; They are the minority, though.

Anyway, I'm not like this guy. I respect people individually. It doesn't mean I have to accept and admire their choices. Everyone deserves to be respected, though.

Keep up with this great thread, guys.

Raf.

[Abhaya]

As for not including plants in speciesism. See the article I just posted

it was terrible? just because you don't see a "save the carrot" society doesn't mean a damn thing... there wasn't a "save the jews" society during the holocaust, that logic is well.. there is no logic really.



As for boiling all experience down to energy waves.... While I agree to a large level with that being an aspect of reality, to take said thinking to far is quite dangerous. For instance then we could make a case for cannibalism being acceptable too. If we apply said logic to sex life then, could we not say the sexual desires of a pedofile are simply another energy pattern that when thought about right can be embraced as well. When played out to its limit it paves the way for chaos.

Cannibalism is socially unacceptable, just like eating dogs is in america; but it is practiced in other parts of the world ( just like eating dogs). The next step in this discussion leads to a quantifiable topic.

Which life is "worth more" than another? clearly vegans do not care about plant life, I'd guess insect life is also not cared for? how about reptiles, do they count or are they in kind of a grey fuzzy area? is it only mammals that we are concerned with? which life meets the cut off point (if you are going to set one)? this is where your cannibalism argument goes...

as for pedophile, that ignores a very key point of my short writing.. intent.

if the intent is for good, pedophilia does not have a place, and is completely irrelevant to the argument. Trying to prove a point by bring up extremes is a very common tactic, its more exciting and extremes (duality) is the bread and butter of existence so its understandable; but its still not applicable.



Again there is fine line between hatred and justified anger

fighting fire with fire burns the whole world down.


anger (aka fear, the dark side of emotion) is the wrong side, come into the light!


if that is your understanding of "reality" (which to me is the only one that makes sense & quantum theory implies this) then your experience of "veganism" is just as valid as my experience of "omnivorism", spending extra energy on one or the other "because they (the ideologies) are convenient for us to prance around on." when we could be changing the experience to a more accepting, positive understanding, that as the highest expression of consciousness (that we for sure know of) and creative force we are responsible for; well that just seems like silly expenditure of consciousness.



Here you clearly state that according to your energy wave philosphy all experiences can be changed to a more positive one via proper rationale. I argue that this can be a loophole to try to dodge responsibilities earned by original intent. Perhaps to sooth ones self when they feel guilt prior to an original even if sub-conscience intent.

In this later post you back track and say intent is actually the most important thing. But this would destroy your original theory where all experiances including killing and eating meat of any entity can be rationally harmonized as a valid and equal experiance.

I would argue that when one understands that they can live in a way that causes less pain and suffering to the world. Yet they choose to go the more violent path. There is no intent or post eating rationale that can be harmonious, loving, or justified.

[TargeT]

Here you clearly state that according to your energy wave philosphy all experiences can be changed to a more positive one via proper rationale. I argue that this can be a loophole to try to dodge responsibilities earned by original intent. Perhaps to sooth ones self when they feel guilt prior to an original even if sub-conscience intent.
yes, we can change things, I agree. there is no loophole in change, in fact there wouldn't be change with a loophole of dodging responsability... why would there be change at all unless there was a need for it seen?

or do you have a different definition of change?



In this later post you back track and say intent is actually the most important thing. But this would destroy your original theory where all experiances including killing and eating meat of any entity can be harmonized as a valid and equal experiance.

I would argue that when one understands that they can live in a way that causes less pain and suffering to the world. Yet they choose to go the more violent path. There is no intent or post eating rationale that can be harmonious, loving, or justified.

I am pretty purposeful with the words I choose, I did not say intent is the MOST important thing did I, that almost sounds exclusive. I don't think the concept I put forth is being absorbed, your entire argument is invalidated when you mention killing (ending of life), since you participate in it also; this cognizant dissonance is hard for me to understand..

I'll ask again, which life do you value more, where is your scale, what meets your criteria and what doesn't?

and I completely disagree with your last statement, our very "being" is violent, when you live in modern society and use a computer, electricity, drive on roads etc; these are all so intermingled with violence that the hypocrisy of that statement (which is very in line with veganism In my mind, so I'm not overly surprized) very extensive.

[Abhaya]

Here you clearly state that according to your energy wave philosphy all experiences can be changed to a more positive one via proper rationale. I argue that this can be a loophole to try to dodge responsibilities earned by original intent. Perhaps to sooth ones self when they feel guilt prior to an original even if sub-conscience intent.
yes, we can change things, I agree. there is no loophole in change, in fact there wouldn't be change with a loophole of dodging responsability... why would there be change at all unless there was a need for it seen?

or do you have a different definition of change?



In this later post you back track and say intent is actually the most important thing. But this would destroy your original theory where all experiances including killing and eating meat of any entity can be harmonized as a valid and equal experiance.

I would argue that when one understands that they can live in a way that causes less pain and suffering to the world. Yet they choose to go the more violent path. There is no intent or post eating rationale that can be harmonious, loving, or justified.

I am pretty purposeful with the words I choose, I did not say intent is the MOST important thing did I, that almost sounds exclusive. I don't think the concept I put forth is being absorbed, your entire argument is invalidated when you mention killing (ending of life), since you participate in it also; this cognizant dissonance is hard for me to understand..

I'll ask again, which life do you value more, where is your scale, what meets your criteria and what doesn't?

and I completely disagree with your last statement, our very "being" is violent, when you live in modern society and use a computer, electricity, drive on roads etc; these are all so intermingled with violence that the hypocrisy of that statement (which is very in line with veganism In my mind, so I'm not overly surprized) very extensive.

All life is to be valued equally. You are correct that we need to kill to live. It is not a matter of what entity has less value and we should therefor kill. It is a matter of what entities feels the least pain and suffering. And thereby what path can we take that causes the least terror suffering and pain. In the violent material existence we are in this is the best we can hope to do.

Thanks for bringing forward more on this topic. As you have before

[TargeT]

what path can we take that causes the least terror suffering and pain. In the violent material existence we are in this is the best we can hope to do.


I'll assume that is a good summation of most vegan standpoints, but it almost seems more against industrial meat production and less about eating animals; to that point I'll say I'm a meat eating vegan!

[Abhaya]

Well one could argue that the difference in violence between eating slaughter house meat, and eating from a local farmer is greater then the difference between going from eating that local meat and becoming a vegetarian. That point however should only serve to highlight the extreme amount of violence inside the average supermarket steak. And of course I personally don't think that even the violence needed in local farm slaughter is necessary.

Another thing is the shear amount of meat that we eat is frankly insane. Now a days if there isn't meat in the meal it isn't even considered a meal. 150 years ago meat was served as a special occasion a few times a year. The obscene abundance of brutally violent mass produced meat further obscures people's perception as to what's normal.

[Abhaya]

it was terrible? just because you don't see a "save the carrot" society doesn't mean a damn thing... there wasn't a "save the jews" society during the holocaust, that logic is well.. there is no logic really.

Just to expand on this point . During the holocaust, at least in the nazi friendly areas, there wasn't a save the Jews campaign, because it was thought to be justified. It wasn't until later that everyone realized the wrong of their ways. similarly I hope that one day we come to the same realization with our current holocaust of animals, and that the justification we use for slaughter houses today seems as silly as the justification the nazi's put forward for their "slaughter houses"

[Flash]

I cannot believe that no one here has notices the despising, judgemental, red neck, jihadist fundamentalist thinking video Abhaya has posted above. Are you all hooked on fake look???

Please, comment, I cannot admit that people behaving with that spitfull mouth are tolerated on Avalon.

THis is enough to make me get away from vegetarians forever. luckily Carmody's comments were intelligent, balanced and helpful.

[DeDukshyn]

I cannot believe that no one here has notices the despising, judgemental, red neck, jihadist fundamentalist thinking video Abhaya has posted above. Are you all hooked on fake look???

Please, comment, I cannot admit that people behaving with that spitfull mouth are tolerated on Avalon.

THis is enough to make me get away from vegetarians forever. luckily Carmody's comments were intelligent, balanced and helpful.

I'm an ominivore slowly converting (it'll be a few years, and if ever in need in the future I can get my own food - even in Canada where veggies only grow a few months of the year -- if required), and the only comment I have is that it was Akasha who re-posted it the second time -- not Abhaya as you indicated in the other thread.

However this (flashes reaction - potentially valid from her perspective) is exactly the issue indicated by one of my earlier points on the subject (most notably in a pm exchange to Akasha (who I know consider a friend and understand moreso henceforth), but also publicly). Coming across as offensive serves no one's interests. Really - it is true. The range of the offended is commonly quite broad per incident. Just an observation, no offense to Akasha, Abhaya, nor to Flash for my not having blatant instant support, my fellow omnivore :)-- (avoiding the bar-b-q ;))

[Abhaya]

Flash u are on a rampage. Maybe it's time to take a breather. You are trying to turn that vid into something it isn't even close to. If a mod were to over look the interactions between us I would be curious as to who is really stepping over the line. Did u call Akasha and I jihadist retards on the other thread?.... Lol come on let it go. If u get so heated over this subject maybe this is life telling you that you should reevaluate your eating habits. We all should be in a constant process of bettering ourselves in so many ways. I have no hard feelings towards u. Trust me. If u are so angered by our threads please feel free to ignore them. And when u feel like it join the debate. We can both grow from the interaction I'm sure

[Abhaya]

I cannot believe that no one here has notices the despising, judgemental, red neck, jihadist fundamentalist thinking video Abhaya has posted above. Are you all hooked on fake look???

Please, comment, I cannot admit that people behaving with that spitfull mouth are tolerated on Avalon.

THis is enough to make me get away from vegetarians forever. luckily Carmody's comments were intelligent, balanced and helpful.

I'm an ominivore slowly converting (it'll be a few years, and if ever in need in the future I can get my own food - even in Canada where veggies only grow a few months of the year -- if required), and the only comment I have is that it was Akasha who re-posted it the second time -- not Abhaya as you indicated in the other thread.

However this is exactly one of my earlier points on the subject. Coming across as offensive serves no ones interests. Really - it is true. The range of the offended is commonly quite broad per incident. Just an observation, no offense to Akasha, nor to Flash for my not having blatant instant support, my fellow omnivore :)-- (avoiding the bar-b-q ;))

I will agree that the vid was probably a long shot at being effective. Honestly we just liked it and had to put it up. Lol. Lesson learned. I think though that the dislikers may have pounced on the offense first. The video was receiving quite a few likes before the unslought began. So it was appreciated by some I hope. Perhaps some appreciators who didn't want to get in the line of fire once that train started rolling.

And a thanks to DD who has contributed to many a quality discussion on this thread! :peace:

[OnyxKnight]

A friend brought this video to my attention. I have to say I agree 10 fold.

M9WcVOaFg-A

Here she is the self proclaimed vegan b*tch.

Defy her if you dare ;)

It's short come on watch it! :p

I'd defy her. I'd eat a hamburger in front of her.

She needs to get a life and a bit of a grip on reality.

[donk]

While our treatment of animals is the most obvious example of it, it is our treatment of all of “nature”, including plants and the land that is the most important aspect of the way our lives…which determines the way we treat each other.

John Zerzan uses anthropological evidence to show how domestication—the domination of nature by man—lead to symbolic language, which gives us culture, which brings us violence:

http://www.primitivism.com/emptiness.htm

It’s our relationship with reality that determines how we treat ourselves and All That Is.

[Akasha]

I think we can treat each other with kindness one day once we learn to treat the animals with kindness.

Gary Yourofsky (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Yourofsky)

xYP1GGdRMYo

[Pam]

Akasha, I want to thank you for bringing up this topic and taking the time to provide these wonderful quotes. To dishonor our fellow cohabitants on this planet with cruelty and indifference because we are superior to them is in my estimation, madness. I really don't know know how one can have internal dignity while in denial or avoidance about the way animals are treated. I recently saw a commercial on television that showed a gold fish flopping around and dying. This was supposed to be a cute and funny commercial. What does that say about us as human beings?

I do not believe humans will evolve beyond the chaotic mess we have created until humans evolve to honor and respect all living things not just their pets.

Although I am a vegetarian, I appreciate your contributions Mischief and Etheric Underground. Even though you choose to eat meat you are showing respect to the sacrifice of life. I have always found it very difficult to know that on this planet it is necessary to take the life of something just to live, whether that be plant or animal.

I am hoping that this thread will not digress into a vegan bashing as I have seen here before. If you are not interested in this topic and have nothing to contribute but negativity, please find another thread that does interest you.

[TargeT]

I do not believe humans will evolve beyond the chaotic mess we have created until humans evolve to honor and respect all living things not just their pets.


Chaotic mess we have created?

Really?

When’s the last time you were in Nature, like real nature?

Did you know that during WW1 the German and Russian soldiers called an unauthorized cease fire in order to hunt a super pack of wolves (http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?_r=1&res=9E0DE3DD103BE03ABC4151DFB166838C609EDE&oref=slogin) that was killing both sides in huge numbers?


Think that doesn't happen today? in 2011 a MEGA super pack of some 400 wolves (http://themoscownews.com/russia/20110119/188345781.html)was hunted down in Siberia after they killed 30 horses.


we didn't create chaos, we were born into it, we adapted to it so people could make interesting decisions like eating vegan; the world humans occupy (in the 1st world) is very gentile and very unrealistic compared to the ACTUAL world we live in (aka: without technology we would be screwed).

the vegan/normal eating debate is silly, make the choices you want, deal with the consequences... vegans are responsible for a lot of animal deaths just like regular diet following people; we should all attempt to be less cruel and more grateful for what we have. The "debate" should end with that.

some vegans face resistance due to their hypocritical ideologies and aggressive persuasion tactics (usually shame, blame, and guilt (http://ashleyturner.org/stress-relief/winning-the-shame-blame-guilt-game-ashley-turner/)).

[Abhaya]

Just be as non violent as you can in your eating habits. Simple stuff

[Robin]

I think we can treat each other with kindness one day once we learn to treat the animals with kindness.

Gary Yourofsky (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Yourofsky)

xYP1GGdRMYo

Thank you for sharing this, my friend.

Gary is the "Mark Passio (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C1pkJaNbzLU)" of spreading the Truth about veganism and ethics. It is no accident that Mark Passio also abstains from eating animals.

What needs to be said about eating animals has already been said countless times before on this forum, so I'm just going to leave this one comment. If we are going to consciously evolve to a higher state of awareness and being, then we need to seriously think about what we want collectively to embrace when it comes to consumption.

[onawah]

I get too emotional about the cruel and inhumane treatment of animals to really get into this subject yet again on Avalon.
But I sign lots of petitions, write letters to officials, etc about better treatment for animals and for the environment.
I think the two issues are inextricably linked.
I was a lacto-vegetarian for many years, then a raw foods vegan for years, then a lacto-vegetarian again, and then for a couple of years I was mainly lacto-vegetarian, but ate some organic, free range poultry and a lilttle fish.
I stopped eating poultry when my kitty died.
( I began buying the poultry and fish for her, but there was always so much of it that I started eating some of it too, (she didn't care for it much after it had been frozen), though I didn't feel good about it.)
I'm still eating wild caught salmon once in awhile, but that will probably be phased out too before long.
The dairy I eat is organic and mainly pastured, and local when possible.
There is no doubt in my mind whatsoever that eating meat has a negative effect on humans, even if the animals are treated humanely.
I think it's pretty safe to bet that spiritually advanced ET races are not predatory, but are compassionate and caring towards other life forms.
What goes around comes around, and imho, we would be wise as a race to emulate them.

[onawah]

I've recommended this video on a couple of other threads as well, but it's especially pertinent to this thread starting at about 1:21:00 in...

hvtY3Y4B6BY

[Akasha]

Just came back here to post the following short video by New York Times bestselling author, Kathy Freston (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kathy_Freston) and was really surprised and encouraged by all the post Gary Y. post (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?62855-Does-Our-Treatment-of-Animals-Affect-How-We-Treat-Each-Other&p=833304&viewfull=1#post833304) posts (even yours Target :p) so thanks to everyone who is helping maintain the profile of this thread, for and against.

Target, in response to your highlighting of the mega wolf pack phenomenon, one would have to seriously consider if man's hostility towards wolves over the millennia have not almost exclusively contributed towards such a phenomenon by concentrating their numbers into more and more remote, but at the same time smaller and smaller areas of the globe. With that thought in mind, I still see peterpam's "chaotic mess" comment as perfectly valid.

You are also more than welcome to elaborate on the following statement (I'm not necessarily disputing it but I feel it would be prudent to give examples):


.....vegans are responsible for a lot of animal deaths just like regular diet following people.....

I would also suggest that adjectives such as "normal" and "regular" when put before the notion of carnism are misleading and evidence of conditioning. If the vast majority of the population engaged in a practice which you and I could both agree was actually abnormal and irregular (perhaps TV would be a good example), would that practice still be "normal" or "regular" solely based on consensus or could there be a higher, objective state (dare i say it?) of truth on the subject irrespective of mass human behavior?

Anyway, here's Kathy Freston on being a veganist (http://www.oprah.com/oprahshow/Kathy-Freston-on-Being-a-Veganist-Video).

[TargeT]

Just came back here to post the following short video by New York Times bestselling author, Kathy Freston (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kathy_Freston) and was really surprised and encouraged by all the post Gary Y. post (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?62855-Does-Our-Treatment-of-Animals-Affect-How-We-Treat-Each-Other&p=833304&viewfull=1#post833304) posts (even yours Target :p) so thanks to everyone who is helping maintain the profile of this thread, for and against.

I'll be the first to admit I'm playing devils advocate on this one; I'm a big proponent of free will and what you eat is a huge daily example of that, but a discussion with out two sides is basically just mental masturbation.



Target, in response to your highlighting of the mega wolf pack phenomenon, one would have to seriously consider if man's hostility towards wolves over the millennia have not almost exclusively contributed towards such a phenomenon by concentrating their numbers into more and more remote, but at the same time smaller and smaller areas of the globe. With that thought in mind, I still see peterpam's "chaotic mess" comment as perfectly valid.

since 7 billion people could fit in the state of Texas and live with the comfort of New York City population (http://www.simplyshrug.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=63:the-overpopulation-myth&catid=31:general&Itemid=50)) (pretty spacious when compared to how Asian country citizens live) it's also estimated that we have influence over about 29% of the land on earth (though occupy less than 1% of that 29%).

So I don't really agree with your above statement in the context that you said it.



You are also more than welcome to elaborate on the following statement (I'm not necessarily disputing it but I feel it would be prudent to give examples):


.....vegans are responsible for a lot of animal deaths just like regular diet following people.....

I would also suggest that adjectives such as "normal" and "regular" when put before the notion of carnism are misleading and evidence of conditioning. If the vast majority of the population engaged in a practice which you and I could both agree was actually abnormal and irregular (perhaps TV would be a good example), would that practice still be "normal" or "regular" solely based on consensus or could there be a higher, objective state (dare i say it?) of truth on the subject irrespective of mass human behavior?
.

it is regular, that is not a conditioned thought; for all of history meat has "been on the table"; veganism more closely fits what you are getting at above.

Regular:

reg·u·lar
ˈregyələr,ˈreg(ə)lər/Submit
adjective
1.
arranged in or constituting a constant or definite pattern, especially with the same space between individual instances.
"place the flags at regular intervals"
synonyms: methodical, systematic, structured, (well) ordered, (well) organized, orderly, efficient More
antonyms: haphazard
happening in such a pattern with the same time between individual instances; recurring at short uniform intervals.
"a regular monthly check"
synonyms: uniform, even, consistent, constant, unchanging, unvarying, fixed More
antonyms: erratic, unsteady
(of a structure or arrangement) arranged in or constituting a symmetrical or harmonious pattern.
"beautifully regular, heart-shaped leaves"
(of a person) defecating or menstruating at predictable times.
2.
done or happening frequently. and regular are just being used by based on their definitions, not with any attached emotion or inference.

Normal (though I didn't use it)


nor·mal
ˈnôrməl/Submit
adjective
1.
conforming to a standard; usual, typical, or expected.


also, "carnism" is a bit of a loaded term with LOTS of emotion attached (as most belief systems are)


Carnism
“carn” means “flesh” or “of the flesh” and “ism” denotes a belief system.

since "carnism" focuses solely on meat and ignores the rest of the Omnivore that we are I'd say it's not a very good term, rather ignorant really.

Vegan-ism (and it definitely meats the "ism" definition, more so than the fallacious application of "carnism") can work for some people, but it's just not a healthy way to eat based on our biochemistry. If you look at data this is clear.

Now, at the same time, the "vegan way", is a perfectly acceptable application of free will; just like celibacy or vows of silence. However, like most belief systems, the desire to impose that belief on others seems unavoidable.

and THAT is why I tend to disagree with it the belief.

[Akasha]

Thanks for your reply, TargeT. Regarding the wolves, I was merely pointing out that as man has developed livestock farming over the millennia, he has driven wolf populations further and further north (at least in Europe, the Eastern Block and Russia) to less densely human populated regions such as Siberia. That's well established.
Sure, you could fit the population of the planet, at the density of NYC, into the state of Texas but I don't really follow your logic since, as I'm sure you're aware, not many wolves have been sighted in the Bronx recently..... with the exception of within certain zoos of course. They prefer their habitat a little more rambling.

Now, as i said in my previous post, I would appreciate it if you could elaborate on the following statement :


.....vegans are responsible for a lot of animal deaths just like regular diet following people.....





Normal (though I didn't use it)

Except here:


.....the vegan/normal eating debate is silly.....

I would venture to disagree here since many folk may be in a state of dietary transition whereby input from this kind of dialogue could be instrumental in swaying them in one direction or another.





.....it is regular, that is not a conditioned thought.....

My use of the word conditioning was in the context of what happens when a regular ;) young child is confronted with a rabbit and an apple. The notion of playing with the apple and killing and eating the rabbit is totally alien to the child in question but through conditioning the cognitive dissonance which naturally ensues through such abhorrent acts (at least to the child at the time) is in most cases effectively managed.
Of course meat has "been on the table" for time, but if children had been given the choice at a young age rather than being duped or threatened by concerned parents into it's consumption wouldn't you agree that things might be different now?


.....since "carnism" focuses solely on meat and ignores the rest of the Omnivore that we are I'd say it's not a very good term, rather ignorant really.....

Melanie Joy coined the term "carnism". I posted one of her presentations on the topic near the beginning of the thread but I'll repost it here for convenience. IMO she makes an excellent case for carnism being deserving of it's "ism" status. Maybe check it out if you get time.....and feel free to comment on it too.

All the best.

7vWbV9FPo_Q

[onawah]

IMHO, if there are more actions taken like this to awaken humanity's compassion, there is hope for the planet yet.
Right action begins with right intention.
There must be compassion for animals who suffer as well as for the humans who do not yet understand how karma works.
From: In Defense of Animals
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10152457075947346&set=pb.5956327345.-2207520000.1402247633.&type=3&theater

Last Saturday, May 31, IDA tabled at the 4th Annual National Animal Rights Day in Los Angeles, where hundreds of activists participated in a ritual to honor animals that suffer at the hands of humans. After a moving memorial service, activists signed the Declaration of Animal Rights, inspiring onlookers to join the movement. IDA distributed literature to help spread the message of compassion for all beings.
https://scontent-b-ord.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xfp1/t1.0-9/10390316_10152457075947346_5181504128103172320_n.jpg

[donk]

I couldn't help but think of this thread when listening to Linda's and Art's back-and-forth (thanks to Calz, who posted this elsewhere), I tend to think her view on the situation fits well with the central thought of this thread:

kh8gOgK8oWk

BONUS: Serpo AND Mantis beings are discussed

[Akasha]

Abby Martin interviews Gary Francione. Gary makes some profound statements not least of which that the amount of grain used to feed the cattle across the globe could literally feed the world's human population instead:

QIcRDen6PEU

[TargeT]

Abby Martin interviews Gary Francione. Gary makes some profound statements not least of which that the amount of grain used to feed slowly kill and fatten the cattle across the globe could literally feed the world's human population instead:


aaaannndddd FIXED!


Grass fed beef is vastly superior in everything except texture (the "marbled" grain fed meat is tender, generally because the cattle doesn't move much in feed lots).

[Akasha]

Abby Martin interviews Gary Francione. Gary makes some profound statements not least of which that the amount of grain used to feed slowly kill and fatten the cattle across the globe could literally feed the world's human population instead:


aaaannndddd FIXED!

Indeed!


Grass fed beef is vastly superior in everything except texture (the "marbled" grain fed meat is tender, generally because the cattle doesn't move much in feed lots).

I appreciate that you aren't necessarily coming from the welfare angle with the grass fed comment, but you still represent a sector of the market which inadvertently ups the bar on animal welfare through your decision to buy such products and that is clearly less negative than buying into the factory alternative for sure.

However, watch the interview and you'll see how and why Gary rejects the welfare argument (grass fed, organic, cage free, humanely slaughtered etc...) in favour of the abolitionist approach.

[TargeT]

I appreciate that you aren't necessarily coming from the welfare angle with the grass fed comment, but you still represent a sector of the market which inadvertently ups the bar on animal welfare through your decision to buy such products and that is clearly less negative than buying into the factory alternative for sure.

However, watch the interview and you'll see how and why Gary rejects the welfare argument (grass fed, organic, cage free, humanely slaughtered etc...) in favour of the abolitionist approach.

Oh I think I am, I'm a huge proponent of animal WELFARE, I however will not ever support animal "rights", and free range cattle isn't an inadvertently supportive action.

everything is in the same system, the better "things are" (living conditions et al) the better the system is.


YET, I feel that expansion and entropy both must exist, the negative and positive are what keep reality functioning, now do you want to have the negative be the moon, or the earth, that is the question I suppose.

[Akasha]

the negative and positive are what keep reality functioning

I'm with you with regard to protons and electrons. However, extrapolating that theory out to the realms of suffering being necessary…."to keep reality functioning", I'm not so sure about.

BTW I appreciate that you are a proponent of animal welfare as opposed to an unconcerned meat eater and just to clarify, of course buying into free range whatever is not supporting the abolitionist/rights stance. I meant you were supporting the welfare perspective in my previous post. Sorry if that was unclear ;).

[Abhaya]

great video akasha! i always loved the argument of severly mentally disabled people. How is it that society grants them unquestioned individual rights when animals which may actually pocess a higher level of consciousness then some disabled people are never thought to be worthy of having even the indivudual right to life, let alone any other rights. I hope i can see the day when animal rights is just common sense. After all, only a hunndred plus years ago, the thought of black people having rights was as absurd as this sounds to many today. :)

[Abhaya]

thinking about it more and I felt like the "what about plants having rights then" argument was inevidable to follow. and rightfully so in many respects. But of course we have to kill to live on this plane of exsistance. horrible fact. But I was thinking about a compromise on where to draw the line on what forms of life are given rights. IMHO i think it only natural to base this on how conscious a being is, to the best of our ability to decifer (not perfect I know, but we can only do our best right?), beings which clearly have affection for their young, feel phsyical pain similar to how we feel it, display curriosity and awareness, should be given in my opinion rights of any sentiant being, and certainly the right to its life. And beings, which as far as we can tell, percieve the least levels of pain and least levels of awareness can be used as food. I think this is the best we can do IMO. Would love to hear ideas about where we can draw this line.

[Pam]

thinking about it more and I felt like the "what about plants having rights then" argument was inevidable to follow. and rightfully so in many respects. But of course we have to kill to live on this plane of exsistance. horrible fact. But I was thinking about a compromise on where to draw the line on what forms of life are given rights. IMHO i think it only natural to base this on how conscious a being is, to the best of our ability to decifer (not perfect I know, but we can only do our best right?), beings which clearly have affection for their young, feel phsyical pain similar to how we feel it, display curriosity and awareness, should be given in my opinion rights of any sentiant being, and certainly the right to its life. And beings, which as far as we can tell, percieve the least levels of pain and least levels of awareness can be used as food. I think this is the best we can do IMO. Would love to hear ideas about where we can draw this line.


Abhaya, I am glad you addressed this point and I think your conclusion is the best that we can do at this time. I have always been uncomfortable with the fact that we must kill at some level to exist on this planet, but that is the way it is. I think having respect and gratitude for all things that support our life by giving their life energy is essential for me to have any level of internal peace. If I can look at life on earth as a dance and constant exchange and restructuring of life force it makes it easier to deal with. I always remember that at some time in the future I too will make the ultimate payment and contribute my life energy back to its source and it will again be transmuted into many other things and I find that thought comforting.

[TargeT]

thinking about it more and I felt like the "what about plants having rights then" argument was inevidable to follow. and rightfully so in many respects. But of course we have to kill to live on this plane of exsistance. horrible fact. But I was thinking about a compromise on where to draw the line on what forms of life are given rights. IMHO i think it only natural to base this on how conscious a being is, to the best of our ability to decifer (not perfect I know, but we can only do our best right?), beings which clearly have affection for their young, feel phsyical pain similar to how we feel it, display curriosity and awareness, should be given in my opinion rights of any sentiant being, and certainly the right to its life. And beings, which as far as we can tell, percieve the least levels of pain and least levels of awareness can be used as food. I think this is the best we can do IMO. Would love to hear ideas about where we can draw this line.


Abhaya, I am glad you addressed this point and I think your conclusion is the best that we can do at this time. I have always been uncomfortable with the fact that we must kill at some level to exist on this planet, but that is the way it is. I think having respect and gratitude for all things that support our life by giving their life energy is essential for me to have any level of internal peace. If I can look at life on earth as a dance and constant exchange and restructuring of life force it makes it easier to deal with. I always remember that at some time in the future I too will make the ultimate payment and contribute my life energy back to its source and it will again be transmuted into many other things and I find that thought comforting.


well now the discussion has degraded into speciesism; just because we don't understand the plant world very well doesn't mean it deserves an entirely different category of "life"

it looks like the above argument can be condensed to: life that feels emotion should not be eaten

and parts of the argument are almost invalidated already, most animals I work with do NOT react to pain as humans do; and to induce "suffering" (which is entirely a mental construct, and doesn't apply to the less cognitively affluent) I've seen horses with injuries that would have humans writhing in pain on the ground & bedridden; yet the horse was fine and didn't even mind extremely invasive cleaning of the wound (I had my hand inside a 8" long laceration, between muscles in her shoulder while trying to wash it out to prevent infection).

curiosity and "awareness" are tough ones and really you could get into a debate on free will...

Skip to 1:57:23
w8Q6CWv7IXo

This is a very debatable topic (free will)

so there's some thoughts

[Abhaya]

thinking about it more and I felt like the "what about plants having rights then" argument was inevidable to follow. and rightfully so in many respects. But of course we have to kill to live on this plane of exsistance. horrible fact. But I was thinking about a compromise on where to draw the line on what forms of life are given rights. IMHO i think it only natural to base this on how conscious a being is, to the best of our ability to decifer (not perfect I know, but we can only do our best right?), beings which clearly have affection for their young, feel phsyical pain similar to how we feel it, display curriosity and awareness, should be given in my opinion rights of any sentiant being, and certainly the right to its life. And beings, which as far as we can tell, percieve the least levels of pain and least levels of awareness can be used as food. I think this is the best we can do IMO. Would love to hear ideas about where we can draw this line.


Abhaya, I am glad you addressed this point and I think your conclusion is the best that we can do at this time. I have always been uncomfortable with the fact that we must kill at some level to exist on this planet, but that is the way it is. I think having respect and gratitude for all things that support our life by giving their life energy is essential for me to have any level of internal peace. If I can look at life on earth as a dance and constant exchange and restructuring of life force it makes it easier to deal with. I always remember that at some time in the future I too will make the ultimate payment and contribute my life energy back to its source and it will again be transmuted into many other things and I find that thought comforting.


well now the discussion has degraded into speciesism; just because we don't understand the plant world very well doesn't mean it deserves an entirely different category of "life"

it looks like the above argument can be condensed to: life that feels emotion should not be eaten

and parts of the argument are almost invalidated already, most animals I work with do NOT react to pain as humans do; and to induce "suffering" (which is entirely a mental construct, and doesn't apply to the less cognitively affluent) I've seen horses with injuries that would have humans writhing in pain on the ground & bedridden; yet the horse was fine and didn't even mind extremely invasive cleaning of the wound (I had my hand inside a 8" long laceration, between muscles in her shoulder while trying to wash it out to prevent infection).

curiosity and "awareness" are tough ones and really you could get into a debate on free will...

Skip to 1:57:23
w8Q6CWv7IXo

This is a very debatable topic (free will)

so there's some thoughts


Actually I think even to summarize with something like, things which feel emotions should be granted the rights to its own life, is maybe not so far fetched. It's true we can never definitively, through logic, know that plants are not secretly more advanced then other animals. And in fact if you really believe that plants are the more aware conscious species, and that cows and horses feel the least amount of pain and suffering, and therefor to kill them and never pluck a carrot is the kindest way you can sincerely live then you are doing your best. We cannot ever know anything conclusively through logic. We have to trust our hearts to a large extent as to what is the kindest way to live. To me it feels obvious that plant life dosnt have the facility to feel pain terror and suffering like myself or like large seemingly intelligent emotional creatures like a cow. I don't know this because of putting anything under the microscope it just resonates in my heart.

As for horses and cows not feeling pain similar to humans I don't think I can go to far with you on that one. Humans when dealt massive injuries often go into complete numbness due to shock also. And I don't need to search very hard to show videos of farm animals screeching in pain at the slaughter house.

I think the danger here is to think that because logically we can't know if a plant is really more or less sentient then a cow (even though common experience would tell us so in most cases) that therefor because we can't know there is no point to try to "kill kinder" because "who knows" if we are really doing a better thing. And as a result of that we make the decision heavily if not completely determined only by what tastes better. That is not ok IMO. We have to trust our hearts and live as kindly as we sincerely feel we can in our eating habits and in life in general. If we try to limit/reduce anything in life down to simply logic and not what's in our hearts it will always turn to chaos. Logic on its own is dry and never quite conclusive enough when it comes to the higher things in life.

[TargeT]

Actually I think even to summarize with something like, things which feel emotions should be granted the rights to its own life, is maybe not so far fetched.

well good, I'm glad I could help refine your stance :)



It's true we can never definitively, through logic, know that plants are not secretly more advanced then other animals. And in fact if you really believe that plants are the more aware conscious species, and that cows and horses feel the least amount of pain and suffering, and therefor to kill them and never pluck a carrot is the kindest way you can sincerely live then you are doing your best.

Based on my understanding and theories of reality, this is all that matters.



We cannot ever know anything conclusively through logic.

I suppose in the context of this particular conversation, at this particular point in time, that statement is correct... however I'd counter with the following statement:

We cannot ever knowing anything conclusively with out logic.



We have to trust our hearts to a large extent as to what is the kindest way to live. To me it feels obvious that plant life dosnt have the facility to feel pain terror and suffering like myself or like large seemingly intelligent emotional creatures like a cow. I don't know this because of putting anything under the microscope it just resonates in my heart.

And in 1810 I bet that it was "obvious" that slaves (generally high melanin content individuals) didn't deserve treatment different from mules either....

and I don't know what to do with a statement like "resonates in my heart"; your feelings are valid but not overly applicable to a discussion outside of your own head.



As for horses and cows not feeling pain similar to humans I don't think I can go to far with you on that one. Humans when dealt massive injuries often go into complete numbness due to shock also. And I don't need to search very hard to show videos of farm animals screeching in pain at the slaughter house.

you say "screeching in pain" and I wonder what you are watching? there's "protest noises" for sure, but my horses do the same when they are separated from their herd or their buddies, they let out extremely loud "urgent" sounding calls.



I think the danger here is to think that because logically we can't know if a plant is really more or less sentient then a cow (even though common experience would tell us so in most cases) that therefor because we can't know there is no point to try to "kill kinder" because "who knows" if we are really doing a better thing. And as a result of that we make the decision heavily if not completely determined only by what tastes better. That is not ok IMO. We have to trust our hearts and live as kindly as we sincerely feel we can in our eating habits and in life in general. If we try to limit/reduce anything in life down to simply logic and not what's in our hearts it will always turn to chaos. Logic on its own is dry and never quite conclusive enough when it comes to the higher things in life.

I'm not so sure we are talking about the same "logic" here..

LOGIC:

Logic (from the Ancient Greek: λογική, logike)[1] is the use and study of valid reasoning.[2][3] The study of logic features most prominently in the subjects of philosophy, mathematics, and computer science.

Logic was studied in several ancient civilizations, including India,[4] China,[5] Persia and Greece. In the West, logic was established as a formal discipline by Aristotle, who gave it a fundamental place in philosophy. The study of logic was part of the classical trivium, which also included grammar and rhetoric. Logic was further extended by Al-Farabi who categorized it into two separate groups (idea and proof). Later, Avicenna revived the study of logic and developed relationship between temporalis and the implication. In the East, logic was developed by Buddhists and Jains.

Logic is often divided into three parts: inductive reasoning, abductive reasoning, and deductive reasoning.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logic


So it seems to me that this debate can be reduced even further to this:

should we act/live based on emotion or based on logic.

and here's what I say to that statement:

Logic is a tool to help paint a clear picture, Emotion is the color that makes the picture beautiful.

Don't confuse the spice for the meal, its the meal you are eating, the spice just makes it memorable.

[Pam]

thinking about it more and I felt like the "what about plants having rights then" argument was inevidable to follow. and rightfully so in many respects. But of course we have to kill to live on this plane of exsistance. horrible fact. But I was thinking about a compromise on where to draw the line on what forms of life are given rights. IMHO i think it only natural to base this on how conscious a being is, to the best of our ability to decifer (not perfect I know, but we can only do our best right?), beings which clearly have affection for their young, feel phsyical pain similar to how we feel it, display curriosity and awareness, should be given in my opinion rights of any sentiant being, and certainly the right to its life. And beings, which as far as we can tell, percieve the least levels of pain and least levels of awareness can be used as food. I think this is the best we can do IMO. Would love to hear ideas about where we can draw this line.




Abhaya, I am glad you addressed this point and I think your conclusion is the best that we can do at this time. I have always been uncomfortable with the fact that we must kill at some level to exist on this planet, but that is the way it is. I think having respect and gratitude for all things that support our life by giving their life energy is essential for me to have any level of internal peace. If I can look at life on earth as a dance and constant exchange and restructuring of life force it makes it easier to deal with. I always remember that at some time in the future I too will make the ultimate payment and contribute my life energy back to its source and it will again be transmuted into many other things and I find that thought comforting.


well now the discussion has degraded into speciesism; just because we don't understand the plant world very well doesn't mean it deserves an entirely different category of "life"

it looks like the above argument can be condensed to: life that feels emotion should not be eaten

and parts of the argument are almost invalidated already, most animals I work with do NOT react to pain as humans do; and to induce "suffering" (which is entirely a mental construct, and doesn't apply to the less cognitively affluent) I've seen horses with injuries that would have humans writhing in pain on the ground & bedridden; yet the horse was fine and didn't even mind extremely invasive cleaning of the wound (I had my hand inside a 8" long laceration, between muscles in her shoulder while trying to wash it out to prevent infection).

curiosity and "awareness" are tough ones and really you could get into a debate on free will...

Skip to 1:57:23
w8Q6CWv7IXo

This is a very debatable topic (free will)

so there's some thoughts







TargeT, you have summarized my stance in the following statement "Life that feels emotion should not be eaten" I don't feel that was my intent at all. I am acknowledging that most people are required to eat something to live. In no way did I state that plants have emotions nor did I say they suffer. What I do know is that they are alive, they transmute life energy under the direction of dna in the seed into a growing, changing plant. There have been studies that indicate they respond to music, and that they respond to stimuli. I have come to the conclusion that they possess some level of consciousness. I did not say they should not be eaten, merely that I choose to have respect and gratitude for the life that that plant is. I feel I benefit from this attitude in a number of way. If I approach a meal with the attitude of gratitude, I enjoy it more and digest it better. It is difficult to be tense and angry when one has gratitude.

I do understand that I have personified suffering in the animal world. I do not know for sure what they experience. You, have justified and interpreted what others may interpret as suffering as 'protest noises'. You have a right to interpret anything anyway you want. Do you ever consider you may be attempting to justify your actions in the way you respond to animals? I also wonder if that is why you take such a vitriolic stance on this topic, I really don't see you responding this way on other topics.

[Akasha]

Target, Abhaya's "resonates in my heart" statement is no different from your "feelings" about polarity (which I'd enjoy some form of elaboration on). I dare say you experience those "feelings" in your heart, right? If not, where?

Don't we all want a transition to a more heart-centered world? I appreciate that that phrase could be dismissed as abstract and meaningless when perceived through the eyes of logic, but the heart immediately "resonates" with the expression (I hope) :p.

[TargeT]

TargeT, you have summarized my stance in the following statement "Life that feels emotion should not be eaten" I don't feel that was my intent at all.

Yes, its hard to communicate via text, I was refering mostly to the post that you were refering to, yet somewhat including your response also.. anyway my post was more to the OP and his comment which you were commenting on.. haha


I choose to have respect and gratitude for the life that that plant is. I feel I benefit from this attitude in a number of way. If I approach a meal with the attitude of gratitude, I enjoy it more and digest it better. It is difficult to be tense and angry when one has gratitude.

Yes, this is how I function in this matter also; however I try to also be this way in all of live.



I do understand that I have personified suffering in the animal world. I do not know for sure what they experience. You, have justified and interpreted what others may interpret as suffering as 'protest noises'. You have a right to interpret anything anyway you want. Do you ever consider you may be attempting to justify your actions in the way you respond to animals? I also wonder if that is why you take such a vitriolic stance on this topic, I really don't see you responding this way on other topics.


I'm taking on the mantle of protagonist in this case because Akasha has expressed gratitude at my attempts to further this conversation, it keeps the topic fresh in the minds of those forum members that choose to read this post ( 11 people as I post this). I find "vegans" fascinating in their fervent connection to their belief system (and the various things its based on, though usually its just emotion) but other than that my interest in this topic is pretty low, we all should be free to do (almost always, or maybe always?) as we please as long as the intent is pure.

and my comment about "protest noises" is due to my intimate relationships with horses that I have from running a horse rescue (https://www.facebook.com/cruzancowgirlshorserescue) (currently there are 22 horses under our care in various conditions).

Also

I'm a bit of a communication nazi, you labeled my posts here as vitriolic and I'm not sure if you just enjoy using the word or don't understand it's definition.

vit·ri·ol·ic
ˌvitrēˈälik/
adjective
adjective: vitriolic

filled with bitter criticism or malice.
"vitriolic attacks on the politicians"

hopefully I'm not coming across as bitter or full of malice, that was not my intent.


Target, Abhaya's "resonates in my heart" statement is no different from your "feelings" about polarity (which I'd enjoy some form of elaboration on). I dare say you experience those "feelings" in your heart, right? If not, where?

Don't we all want a transition to a more heart-centered world? I appreciate that that phrase could be dismissed as abstract and meaningless when perceived through the eyes of logic, but the heart immediately "resonates" with the expression (I hope) :p.

Your are right about my "feelings" on polarity, though I do try my best to verify my ideas with experimentation to clarify and verify that they are valid.

I trust my intuition, but I try to verify also... (Trust, but verify a favorite quote) I guess this would be my answer to any "heart resonance".

[Abhaya]

Actually I think even to summarize with something like, things which feel emotions should be granted the rights to its own life, is maybe not so far fetched.

well good, I'm glad I could help refine your stance :)



It's true we can never definitively, through logic, know that plants are not secretly more advanced then other animals. And in fact if you really believe that plants are the more aware conscious species, and that cows and horses feel the least amount of pain and suffering, and therefor to kill them and never pluck a carrot is the kindest way you can sincerely live then you are doing your best.

Based on my understanding and theories of reality, this is all that matters.



We cannot ever know anything conclusively through logic.

I suppose in the context of this particular conversation, at this particular point in time, that statement is correct... however I'd counter with the following statement:

We cannot ever knowing anything conclusively with out logic.



We have to trust our hearts to a large extent as to what is the kindest way to live. To me it feels obvious that plant life dosnt have the facility to feel pain terror and suffering like myself or like large seemingly intelligent emotional creatures like a cow. I don't know this because of putting anything under the microscope it just resonates in my heart.

And in 1810 I bet that it was "obvious" that slaves (generally high melanin content individuals) didn't deserve treatment different from mules either....

and I don't know what to do with a statement like "resonates in my heart"; your feelings are valid but not overly applicable to a discussion outside of your own head.



As for horses and cows not feeling pain similar to humans I don't think I can go to far with you on that one. Humans when dealt massive injuries often go into complete numbness due to shock also. And I don't need to search very hard to show videos of farm animals screeching in pain at the slaughter house.

you say "screeching in pain" and I wonder what you are watching? there's "protest noises" for sure, but my horses do the same when they are separated from their herd or their buddies, they let out extremely loud "urgent" sounding calls.



I think the danger here is to think that because logically we can't know if a plant is really more or less sentient then a cow (even though common experience would tell us so in most cases) that therefor because we can't know there is no point to try to "kill kinder" because "who knows" if we are really doing a better thing. And as a result of that we make the decision heavily if not completely determined only by what tastes better. That is not ok IMO. We have to trust our hearts and live as kindly as we sincerely feel we can in our eating habits and in life in general. If we try to limit/reduce anything in life down to simply logic and not what's in our hearts it will always turn to chaos. Logic on its own is dry and never quite conclusive enough when it comes to the higher things in life.

I'm not so sure we are talking about the same "logic" here..

LOGIC:

Logic (from the Ancient Greek: λογική, logike)[1] is the use and study of valid reasoning.[2][3] The study of logic features most prominently in the subjects of philosophy, mathematics, and computer science.

Logic was studied in several ancient civilizations, including India,[4] China,[5] Persia and Greece. In the West, logic was established as a formal discipline by Aristotle, who gave it a fundamental place in philosophy. The study of logic was part of the classical trivium, which also included grammar and rhetoric. Logic was further extended by Al-Farabi who categorized it into two separate groups (idea and proof). Later, Avicenna revived the study of logic and developed relationship between temporalis and the implication. In the East, logic was developed by Buddhists and Jains.

Logic is often divided into three parts: inductive reasoning, abductive reasoning, and deductive reasoning.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logic


So it seems to me that this debate can be reduced even further to this:

should we act/live based on emotion or based on logic.

and here's what I say to that statement:

Logic is a tool to help paint a clear picture, Emotion is the color that makes the picture beautiful.

Don't confuse the spice for the meal, its the meal you are eating, the spice just makes it memorable.


I have to disagree with you whole heartedly on this statement "We cannot ever knowing anything conclusively with out logic." Logic as we know it on this plane of existence is just the material minds weak attempt at conquering reality. If we rely on logic, as in 1+1=2, to try to understand the highest depths of reality we are like ants trying to understand the depths of society in a metropolis. Logic has it's place as a tool as you stated. It is helpful for things like, I should go to the store before dark or it will be closed. But there is much well outside the flawed logic in our minds. Higher things which even the most accurate logic will always stumble on, will always have a new theory disrupt its peace. Some things will only be known by introspection and trying to connect with source and the intuition brought about by that. As we grow spiritually and move to more subtle realms, the educated guess logic based thought will be replaced by pure intuition and a knowing and sureness that comes direct from source. Questions like what is the kindest way to live and what species are best to be used as food in a system where something has to be used that way, can really only best be known by this higher means of knowing. And even then we are imperfect in this (myself fist and foremost), we still can and should try our best to listen to this intuition. You said your self that you think we should try to live as kindly as we can in our eating habits so if you are sincerely doing and believe in that then we are in total agreement there. Of course this is all only my opinion based on my own hopefully sincere attempts at trusting in my own heart.

[Abhaya]

And Target has been one of the main engines to this thread to which I do appreciate :). If we watch the threads progression over the pages we see a gradual evolution towards civility on both our parts ;)

[Pris]

I think the danger here is to think that because logically we can't know if a plant is really more or less sentient then a cow (even though common experience would tell us so in most cases) that therefor because we can't know there is no point to try to "kill kinder" because "who knows" if we are really doing a better thing. And as a result of that we make the decision heavily if not completely determined only by what tastes better. That is not ok IMO. We have to trust our hearts and live as kindly as we sincerely feel we can in our eating habits and in life in general. If we try to limit/reduce anything in life down to simply logic and not what's in our hearts it will always turn to chaos. Logic on its own is dry and never quite conclusive enough when it comes to the higher things in life.


Logic is often divided into three parts: inductive reasoning, abductive reasoning, and deductive reasoning.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logic


So it seems to me that this debate can be reduced even further to this:

should we act/live based on emotion or based on logic.

and here's what I say to that statement:

Logic is a tool to help paint a clear picture, Emotion is the color that makes the picture beautiful.

Don't confuse the spice for the meal, its the meal you are eating, the spice just makes it memorable.

I think a lot of how we each decide what is more 'important' or equally important (logic vs feeling/emotion/intuition) is based on our personality type. So, I can't expect my reasoning to be more 'logical' than someone else's feelings just as I can't expect my feelings to be more reasonable than someone else's logic. I like combining both logic and feelings to give my two cents. But, again, that's just my personality type talking.

I feel that plants are closer to 'source' in many ways than the animals. I think they feel in a different way... they are more 'connected', more 'entangled' with everything around them. Like others here, I will not harm/eat animals... I feel they are... too similar to me. I go by my intuition and empathy on that one.

When it comes to surviving here, I need to eat so I choose to eat plants -- not because I think they are 'less important'. Again, it's more of a feeling that says: we're okay if you eat us so long as you are humble and grateful, and sincerely appreciate and thank everything that sacrifices or gives of itself to keep you alive -- that includes all forms of consciousness in combination with the four elements.

Maybe this sounds crazy, but I feel that plants are more... forgiving. It's an 'unconditional love' kind of thing.

My 'logic' and my 'emotion' combined to come up with this point-of-view. For myself, I am happy living within this... ideal.

[Abhaya]

I think the danger here is to think that because logically we can't know if a plant is really more or less sentient then a cow (even though common experience would tell us so in most cases) that therefor because we can't know there is no point to try to "kill kinder" because "who knows" if we are really doing a better thing. And as a result of that we make the decision heavily if not completely determined only by what tastes better. That is not ok IMO. We have to trust our hearts and live as kindly as we sincerely feel we can in our eating habits and in life in general. If we try to limit/reduce anything in life down to simply logic and not what's in our hearts it will always turn to chaos. Logic on its own is dry and never quite conclusive enough when it comes to the higher things in life.


Logic is often divided into three parts: inductive reasoning, abductive reasoning, and deductive reasoning.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logic


So it seems to me that this debate can be reduced even further to this:

should we act/live based on emotion or based on logic.

and here's what I say to that statement:

Logic is a tool to help paint a clear picture, Emotion is the color that makes the picture beautiful.

Don't confuse the spice for the meal, its the meal you are eating, the spice just makes it memorable.

I think a lot of how we each decide what is more 'important' or equally important (logic vs feeling/emotion/intuition) is based on our personality type. So, I can't expect my reasoning to be more 'logical' than someone else's feelings just as I can't expect my feelings to be more reasonable than someone else's logic. I like combining both logic and feelings to give my two cents. But, again, that's just my personality type talking.

I feel that plants are closer to 'source' in many ways than the animals. I think they feel in a different way... they are more 'connected', more 'entangled' with everything around them. Like others here, I will not harm/eat animals... I feel they are... too similar to me. I go by my intuition and empathy on that one.

When it comes to surviving here, I need to eat so I choose to eat plants -- not because I think they are 'less important'. Again, it's more of a feeling that says: we're okay if you eat us so long as you are humble and grateful, and sincerely appreciate and thank everything that sacrifices or gives of itself to keep you alive -- that includes all forms of consciousness in combination with the four elements.

Maybe this sounds crazy, but I feel that plants are more... forgiving. It's an 'unconditional love' kind of thing.

My 'logic' and my 'emotion' combined to come up with this point-of-view. For myself, I am happy living within this... ideal.

I agree and I also don't see plants as less important then any other life. Just that my intuition tells me that the perfect and equal to all other sparks of consciousness, spark of life, embodied in a plant, feels less pain and suffering, while embodied that way, then a spark of consciousness embodied in higher emotional vessels like humans or dolphins, or horses. And Every spark of life has the potential to move towards perfected 12 dimensional beings and upwards. I love your mood of giving thanks to the plants you eat :)

[TargeT]

I have to disagree with you whole heartedly on this statement "We cannot ever knowing anything conclusively with out logic." Logic as we know it on this plane of existence is just the material minds weak attempt at conquering reality. If we rely on logic, as in 1+1=2, to try to understand the highest depths of reality we are like ants trying to understand the depths of society in a metropolis. Logic has it's place as a tool as you stated. It is helpful for things like, I should go to the store before dark or it will be closed. But there is much well outside the flawed logic in our minds. Higher things which even the most accurate logic will always stumble on, will always have a new theory disrupt its peace. Some things will only be known by introspection and trying to connect with source and the intuition brought about by that. As we grow spiritually and move to more subtle realms the educate guessing logic based thought will be replaced by pure intuition and a knowing and sureness that comes direct from source. Questions like what is the kindest way to live and what species are best to be used as food in a system where something has to be used that way, can really only best be known by this higher means of knowing. And even then we are imperfect in this in most cases so we can only try our best. However You said your self that you think we should try to live as kindly as we can in our eating habits so if you are sincerely doing and believe in that then we are in total agreement there. Of course this is all only my opinion based on my own hopefully sincere attempts at trusting in my own heart.


I think you have some hang up on logic, something else is attached there; your not making sense.


Logic is a method, that's it like putting one foot in front of the other to walk, you can put one foot beside each other when you walk too, but it won't work as well.

when understanding topics and the validity of them is the task, logic is the tool; its as simple as that... intuition may be a shortcut to knowing validity but honestly intuition should be validated as it seems pretty clear that there are actual outside influences (in a few flavors) that can put even intuition into a questionable category.

I also think both of us are making a few assumptions that perhaps are not shared, and that further lends to confusion.


So I'll go ahead and disagree with your "whole hearted" disagreement; unless you can provide a logical reason why logic should not be used (haha, use the tool to disprove itself!) currently your own statements waiver between supporting logic (when you mentioned the "the flawed logic in our minds", which infers that were it not flawed, it would be fine) to completely discounting it "Higher things which even the most accurate logic will always stumble on" yet still these statements hardly make sense, the logic is not flawed, the user of the tool is; and logic never stumbles, the same way a hammer doesn't stumble over a nail, it either is used correctly or its not.

Now, Logic is not the only thing that is used for thinking, I am functioning off a (novice) understanding of the Trivium and Quadrivium (aka the 7 liberal arts, aka the ONLY way to accurately think)

for reference, here is the model (and the order is HIGHLY important) I think you will see why my posts are structured as they are (or at lease include what they do) because of my study of this:


The Seven Liberal Arts And Sciences,

Which are Grammar, Rhetoric, Logic, Arithmetic, Geometry, Music, and Astronomy, are here illustrated. Grammar is the science which teaches us to express our ideas in appropriate words, which we may afterward beautify and adorn by means of Rhetoric; while Logic instructs us how to think and reason with propriety, and to make language subordinate to thought. Arithmetic, which is the science of computing by numbers, is absolutely essential, not only to a thorough knowledge of all mathematical science, but also to a proper pursuit of our daily avocations. Geometry, or the application of Arithmetic to sensible quantities, is of all sciences the most important, since by it we are enabled to measure and survey the globe that we inhabit. Its principles extend to other spheres; and, occupied in the contemplation and measurement of the sun, moon, and heavenly bodies, constitute the science of Astronomy; and, lastly, when our minds are filled, and our thoughts enlarged, by the contemplation of all the wonders which these sciences open to our view, Music comes forward, to soften our hearts and cultivate our affections by its soothing influences.


GRAMMAR
Is the key by which alone the door can be opened to the understanding of speech. It is Grammar which reveals the admirable art of language, and unfolds its various constituent parts—its names, definitions, and respective offices; it unravels, as it were, the thread of which the web of speech is composed. These reflections seldom occur to

any one before their acquaintance with the art; yet it is most certain that, without a knowledge of Grammar, it is very difficult to speak with propriety, precision, and purity.


RHETORIC.
It is by Rhetoric that the art of speaking eloquently is acquired. To be an eloquent speaker, in the proper sense of the word, is far from being either a common or an easy attainment: it is the art of being persuasive and commanding; the art, not only of pleasing the fancy, but of speaking both to the understanding and to the heart.


LOGIC
Is that science which directs us how to form clear and distinct ideas of things, and thereby prevents us from being misled by their similitude or resemblance. Of all the human sciences, that concerning man is certainly most worthy of the human mind, and the proper manner of conducting its several powers in the attainment of truth and knowledge. This science ought to be cultivated as the foundation or ground-work of our inquiries; particularly in the pursuit of those sublime principles which claim our attention as Masons.


ARITHMETIC

Is the art of numbering, or that part of the mathematics which considers the properties of numbers in general. We have but a very imperfect idea of things without quantity, and as imperfect of quantity itself, without the help of Arithmetic. All the works of the Almighty are made in number, weight, and measure; therefore, to understand them rightly, we ought to understand arithmetical calculations; and the greater advancement we make in the mathematical sciences, the more capable we shall be of considering such things as are the ordinary objects of our conceptions, and be thereby led to a more comprehensive knowledge of our great Creator and the works of the creation.


GEOMETRY

Treats of the powers and properties of magnitudes in general, where length, breadth, and thickness are considered—from a point to a line, from a line to a superfices, and from a superfices to a solid.

A point is the beginning of all geometrical matter.

A line is a continuation of the same.



A superfices is length and breadth, without a given thickness.

A solid is length and breadth, with a given thickness, which forms a cube, and comprehends the whole.
THE ADVANTAGES OF GEOMETRY.

By this science, the architect is enabled to construct his plans and execute his designs; the general, to arrange his soldiers; the engineer, to mark out grounds for encampments; the geographer, to give us the dimensions of the world, and all things therein contained; to delineate the extent of seas, and specify the divisions of empires, kingdoms, and provinces. By it, also, the astronomer is enabled to make his observations, and to fix the duration of times and seasons, years and cycles. In fine, Geometry is the foundation of architecture, and the root of the mathematics.

The contemplation of this science, in a moral and comprehensive view, fills the mind with rapture. To the true geometrician, the regions of matter with which he is surrounded afford ample scope for his admiration, while they open a sublime field for his inquiry and disquisition.

Every particle of matter on which he treads, every blade of grass which covers the field, every flower which blows, and every infect which wings its way in this expanded space, proves the existence of a First Cause, and yields pleasure to the intelligent mind.

The symmetry, beauty, and order displayed in the various parts



of the animate and inanimate creation, is a pleasing and delightful theme, and naturally leads to the source whence the whole is derived. When we bring within the focus of the eye the variegated carpet of the terrestrial theater, and survey the progress of the vegetative system, our admiration is justly excited. Every plant which grows, every flowering shrub which breathes its sweets, affords instruction and delight. When we extend our views to the animal creation, and contemplate the varied clothing of every species, we are equally struck with astonishment. And when we trace the lines of geometry drawn by the Divine pencil in the beautiful plumage of the feathered tribe, how exalted is our conception of the heavenly work! The admirable structure of plants and animals, and the infinite number of fibers and vessels which run through the whole, with the apt disposition of one part to another, is a perpetual subject of study to the geometrician, who, while he adverts to the changes which all undergo in their progress to maturity, is lost in rapture and veneration of the Great Cause which governs the system.

When he descends into the bowels of the earth, and explores the kingdom of ores, minerals, and fossils, he finds the same instances of Divine Wisdom and Goodness displayed in their formation and structure: every gem and pebble proclaims the handiwork of an Almighty Creator.

When he surveys the watery elements, and directs his attention to the wonders of the deep, with all the inhabitants of the mighty ocean, he perceives emblems of the same supreme intelligence. The scales of the largest fish, as well as the penciled shell of the minutest bivalve, equally yield a theme for his contemplation, on which he fondly dwells, while the symmetry of their formation, and the delicacy of their tints, evince the wisdom of the Divine Artist.

When he exalts his view to the more noble and elevated parts of Nature, and surveys the celestial orbs, how much greater is his astonishment! If, on the principles of geometry and true philosophy, he contemplate the sun, the moon, the stars, and the whole concave of heaven, his pride will be humbled, while he is lost in awful admiration of the Maker. The immense magnitude of those bodies, the regularity and velocity of their motions, and the inconceivable extent of space through which they move, are equally wonderful and incomprehensible, so as to baffle his most daring conceptions, while he labors in considering the immensity of the theme!


MUSIC

Is that elevated science which affects the passions by sound. There are few who have not felt its charms, and acknowledged its expression to be intelligible to the heart. It is a language of delightful sensations, far more eloquent than words; it breathes to the ear the clearest intimations; it touches and gently agitates the agreeable and sublime passions; it wraps us in melancholy, and elevates us in joy; it dissolves and inflames; it melts us in tenderness, and excites us to war. This science is truly congenial to the nature of man; for by its powerful charms the most discordant passions may be harmonized, and brought into perfect unison; but it never sounds with such seraphic harmony as when employed in singing hymns of gratitude to the Creator of the universe.


ASTRONOMY

Is that sublime science which inspires the contemplative mind to soar aloft, and read the wisdom, strength, and beauty of the great Creator in the heavens. How nobly eloquent of the Deity is the celestial hemisphere!—spangled with the most magnificent heralds of his infinite

Assisted by Astronomy, we ascertain the laws which govern the heavenly bodies, and by which their motions are directed; investigate the power by which they circulate in their orbs, discover their size, determine their distance, explain their various phenomena, and correct the fallacy of the senses by the light of truth.
http://www.sacred-texts.com/mas/gar/gar45.htm

7altdvOvvZM

there is much much more on this topic (an excellent link is in my signature as well) but this is a bit off topic, though still related I think.

[Abhaya]

I have to disagree with you whole heartedly on this statement "We cannot ever knowing anything conclusively with out logic." Logic as we know it on this plane of existence is just the material minds weak attempt at conquering reality. If we rely on logic, as in 1+1=2, to try to understand the highest depths of reality we are like ants trying to understand the depths of society in a metropolis. Logic has it's place as a tool as you stated. It is helpful for things like, I should go to the store before dark or it will be closed. But there is much well outside the flawed logic in our minds. Higher things which even the most accurate logic will always stumble on, will always have a new theory disrupt its peace. Some things will only be known by introspection and trying to connect with source and the intuition brought about by that. As we grow spiritually and move to more subtle realms the educate guessing logic based thought will be replaced by pure intuition and a knowing and sureness that comes direct from source. Questions like what is the kindest way to live and what species are best to be used as food in a system where something has to be used that way, can really only best be known by this higher means of knowing. And even then we are imperfect in this in most cases so we can only try our best. However You said your self that you think we should try to live as kindly as we can in our eating habits so if you are sincerely doing and believe in that then we are in total agreement there. Of course this is all only my opinion based on my own hopefully sincere attempts at trusting in my own heart.


I think you have some hang up on logic, something else is attached there; your not making sense.


Logic is a method, that's it like putting one foot in front of the other to walk, you can put one foot beside each other when you walk too, but it won't work as well.

when understanding topics and the validity of them is the task, logic is the tool; its as simple as that... intuition may be a shortcut to knowing validity but honestly intuition should be validated as it seems pretty clear that there are actual outside influences (in a few flavors) that can put even intuition into a questionable category.

I also think both of us are making a few assumptions that perhaps are not shared, and that further lends to confusion.


So I'll go ahead and disagree with your "whole hearted" disagreement; unless you can provide a logical reason why logic should not be used (haha, use the tool to disprove itself!) currently your own statements waiver between supporting logic (when you mentioned the "the flawed logic in our minds", which infers that were it not flawed, it would be fine) to completely discounting it "Higher things which even the most accurate logic will always stumble on" yet still these statements hardly make sense, the logic is not flawed, the user of the tool is; and logic never stumbles, the same way a hammer doesn't stumble over a nail, it either is used correctly or its not.

Now, Logic is not the only thing that is used for thinking, I am functioning off a (novice) understanding of the Trivium and Quadrivium (aka the 7 liberal arts, aka the ONLY way to accurately think)

for reference, here is the model (and the order is HIGHLY important) I think you will see why my posts are structured as they are (or at lease include what they do) because of my study of this:


The Seven Liberal Arts And Sciences,

Which are Grammar, Rhetoric, Logic, Arithmetic, Geometry, Music, and Astronomy, are here illustrated. Grammar is the science which teaches us to express our ideas in appropriate words, which we may afterward beautify and adorn by means of Rhetoric; while Logic instructs us how to think and reason with propriety, and to make language subordinate to thought. Arithmetic, which is the science of computing by numbers, is absolutely essential, not only to a thorough knowledge of all mathematical science, but also to a proper pursuit of our daily avocations. Geometry, or the application of Arithmetic to sensible quantities, is of all sciences the most important, since by it we are enabled to measure and survey the globe that we inhabit. Its principles extend to other spheres; and, occupied in the contemplation and measurement of the sun, moon, and heavenly bodies, constitute the science of Astronomy; and, lastly, when our minds are filled, and our thoughts enlarged, by the contemplation of all the wonders which these sciences open to our view, Music comes forward, to soften our hearts and cultivate our affections by its soothing influences.


GRAMMAR
Is the key by which alone the door can be opened to the understanding of speech. It is Grammar which reveals the admirable art of language, and unfolds its various constituent parts—its names, definitions, and respective offices; it unravels, as it were, the thread of which the web of speech is composed. These reflections seldom occur to

any one before their acquaintance with the art; yet it is most certain that, without a knowledge of Grammar, it is very difficult to speak with propriety, precision, and purity.


RHETORIC.
It is by Rhetoric that the art of speaking eloquently is acquired. To be an eloquent speaker, in the proper sense of the word, is far from being either a common or an easy attainment: it is the art of being persuasive and commanding; the art, not only of pleasing the fancy, but of speaking both to the understanding and to the heart.


LOGIC
Is that science which directs us how to form clear and distinct ideas of things, and thereby prevents us from being misled by their similitude or resemblance. Of all the human sciences, that concerning man is certainly most worthy of the human mind, and the proper manner of conducting its several powers in the attainment of truth and knowledge. This science ought to be cultivated as the foundation or ground-work of our inquiries; particularly in the pursuit of those sublime principles which claim our attention as Masons.


ARITHMETIC

Is the art of numbering, or that part of the mathematics which considers the properties of numbers in general. We have but a very imperfect idea of things without quantity, and as imperfect of quantity itself, without the help of Arithmetic. All the works of the Almighty are made in number, weight, and measure; therefore, to understand them rightly, we ought to understand arithmetical calculations; and the greater advancement we make in the mathematical sciences, the more capable we shall be of considering such things as are the ordinary objects of our conceptions, and be thereby led to a more comprehensive knowledge of our great Creator and the works of the creation.


GEOMETRY

Treats of the powers and properties of magnitudes in general, where length, breadth, and thickness are considered—from a point to a line, from a line to a superfices, and from a superfices to a solid.

A point is the beginning of all geometrical matter.

A line is a continuation of the same.



A superfices is length and breadth, without a given thickness.

A solid is length and breadth, with a given thickness, which forms a cube, and comprehends the whole.
THE ADVANTAGES OF GEOMETRY.

By this science, the architect is enabled to construct his plans and execute his designs; the general, to arrange his soldiers; the engineer, to mark out grounds for encampments; the geographer, to give us the dimensions of the world, and all things therein contained; to delineate the extent of seas, and specify the divisions of empires, kingdoms, and provinces. By it, also, the astronomer is enabled to make his observations, and to fix the duration of times and seasons, years and cycles. In fine, Geometry is the foundation of architecture, and the root of the mathematics.

The contemplation of this science, in a moral and comprehensive view, fills the mind with rapture. To the true geometrician, the regions of matter with which he is surrounded afford ample scope for his admiration, while they open a sublime field for his inquiry and disquisition.

Every particle of matter on which he treads, every blade of grass which covers the field, every flower which blows, and every infect which wings its way in this expanded space, proves the existence of a First Cause, and yields pleasure to the intelligent mind.

The symmetry, beauty, and order displayed in the various parts



of the animate and inanimate creation, is a pleasing and delightful theme, and naturally leads to the source whence the whole is derived. When we bring within the focus of the eye the variegated carpet of the terrestrial theater, and survey the progress of the vegetative system, our admiration is justly excited. Every plant which grows, every flowering shrub which breathes its sweets, affords instruction and delight. When we extend our views to the animal creation, and contemplate the varied clothing of every species, we are equally struck with astonishment. And when we trace the lines of geometry drawn by the Divine pencil in the beautiful plumage of the feathered tribe, how exalted is our conception of the heavenly work! The admirable structure of plants and animals, and the infinite number of fibers and vessels which run through the whole, with the apt disposition of one part to another, is a perpetual subject of study to the geometrician, who, while he adverts to the changes which all undergo in their progress to maturity, is lost in rapture and veneration of the Great Cause which governs the system.

When he descends into the bowels of the earth, and explores the kingdom of ores, minerals, and fossils, he finds the same instances of Divine Wisdom and Goodness displayed in their formation and structure: every gem and pebble proclaims the handiwork of an Almighty Creator.

When he surveys the watery elements, and directs his attention to the wonders of the deep, with all the inhabitants of the mighty ocean, he perceives emblems of the same supreme intelligence. The scales of the largest fish, as well as the penciled shell of the minutest bivalve, equally yield a theme for his contemplation, on which he fondly dwells, while the symmetry of their formation, and the delicacy of their tints, evince the wisdom of the Divine Artist.

When he exalts his view to the more noble and elevated parts of Nature, and surveys the celestial orbs, how much greater is his astonishment! If, on the principles of geometry and true philosophy, he contemplate the sun, the moon, the stars, and the whole concave of heaven, his pride will be humbled, while he is lost in awful admiration of the Maker. The immense magnitude of those bodies, the regularity and velocity of their motions, and the inconceivable extent of space through which they move, are equally wonderful and incomprehensible, so as to baffle his most daring conceptions, while he labors in considering the immensity of the theme!


MUSIC

Is that elevated science which affects the passions by sound. There are few who have not felt its charms, and acknowledged its expression to be intelligible to the heart. It is a language of delightful sensations, far more eloquent than words; it breathes to the ear the clearest intimations; it touches and gently agitates the agreeable and sublime passions; it wraps us in melancholy, and elevates us in joy; it dissolves and inflames; it melts us in tenderness, and excites us to war. This science is truly congenial to the nature of man; for by its powerful charms the most discordant passions may be harmonized, and brought into perfect unison; but it never sounds with such seraphic harmony as when employed in singing hymns of gratitude to the Creator of the universe.


ASTRONOMY

Is that sublime science which inspires the contemplative mind to soar aloft, and read the wisdom, strength, and beauty of the great Creator in the heavens. How nobly eloquent of the Deity is the celestial hemisphere!—spangled with the most magnificent heralds of his infinite

Assisted by Astronomy, we ascertain the laws which govern the heavenly bodies, and by which their motions are directed; investigate the power by which they circulate in their orbs, discover their size, determine their distance, explain their various phenomena, and correct the fallacy of the senses by the light of truth.
http://www.sacred-texts.com/mas/gar/gar45.htm

7altdvOvvZM

there is much much more on this topic (an excellent link is in my signature as well) but this is a bit off topic, though still related I think.

I am in agreement with you that logic is a tool to be used for task based activities. I gave an example in the post of that also. My point is only that there are somethings which logic as a tool falls short of. You can't use a hammer to paint a masterpiece. These matters (which the op topic touches on) are often only known through more subtle methods, meditation, prayer, introspection what have you. A sort of "I don't know how I know it, but I KNOW this as deeply as I know as I'm alive" results when we open ourselves to what the source wants to tell us. And with this topic I feel we all have to open our hearts to what feels sincerely like the best way we can eat in this world and go with that. No apathy or solely heartless logic based decisions allowed :)

[Pam]

TargeT, you have summarized my stance in the following statement "Life that feels emotion should not be eaten" I don't feel that was my intent at all.

Yes, its hard to communicate via text, I was refering mostly to the post that you were refering to, yet somewhat including your response also.. anyway my post was more to the OP and his comment which you were commenting on.. haha


I choose to have respect and gratitude for the life that that plant is. I feel I benefit from this attitude in a number of way. If I approach a meal with the attitude of gratitude, I enjoy it more and digest it better. It is difficult to be tense and angry when one has gratitude.

Yes, this is how I function in this matter also; however I try to also be this way in all of live.



I do understand that I have personified suffering in the animal world. I do not know for sure what they experience. You, have justified and interpreted what others may interpret as suffering as 'protest noises'. You have a right to interpret anything anyway you want. Do you ever consider you may be attempting to justify your actions in the way you respond to animals? I also wonder if that is why you take such a vitriolic stance on this topic, I really don't see you responding this way on other topics.


I'm taking on the mantle of protagonist in this case because Akasha has expressed gratitude at my attempts to further this conversation, it keeps the topic fresh in the minds of those forum members that choose to read this post ( 11 people as I post this). I find "vegans" fascinating in their fervent connection to their belief system (and the various things its based on, though usually its just emotion) but other than that my interest in this topic is pretty low, we all should be free to do (almost always, or maybe always?) as we please as long as the intent is pure.

and my comment about "protest noises" is due to my intimate relationships with horses that I have from running a horse rescue (https://www.facebook.com/cruzancowgirlshorserescue) (currently there are 22 horses under our care in various conditions).

Also

I'm a bit of a communication nazi, you labeled my posts here as vitriolic and I'm not sure if you just enjoy using the word or don't understand it's definition.

vit·ri·ol·ic
ˌvitrēˈälik/
adjective
adjective: vitriolic

filled with bitter criticism or malice.
"vitriolic attacks on the politicians"

hopefully I'm not coming across as bitter or full of malice, that was not my intent.


Target, Abhaya's "resonates in my heart" statement is no different from your "feelings" about polarity (which I'd enjoy some form of elaboration on). I dare say you experience those "feelings" in your heart, right? If not, where?

Don't we all want a transition to a more heart-centered world? I appreciate that that phrase could be dismissed as abstract and meaningless when perceived through the eyes of logic, but the heart immediately "resonates" with the expression (I hope) :p.

Your are right about my "feelings" on polarity, though I do try my best to verify my ideas with experimentation to clarify and verify that they are valid.

I trust my intuition, but I try to verify also... (Trust, but verify a favorite quote of mine) I guess this would be my answer to any "heart resonance".

Again, I'm going to go a little word nazi here..



Targat,


vitriolic-bitter, scathing, toxic..

Yeah, some of your comments do feel that way so I stand by that word. But, I also realize this is just a debate..I am glad you have life and passion in your discussions. You did say it yourself, "I'm a bit of a communication nazi"

Respectfully,

Pam

[Pris]

I think the danger here is to think that because logically we can't know if a plant is really more or less sentient then a cow (even though common experience would tell us so in most cases) that therefor because we can't know there is no point to try to "kill kinder" because "who knows" if we are really doing a better thing. And as a result of that we make the decision heavily if not completely determined only by what tastes better. That is not ok IMO. We have to trust our hearts and live as kindly as we sincerely feel we can in our eating habits and in life in general. If we try to limit/reduce anything in life down to simply logic and not what's in our hearts it will always turn to chaos. Logic on its own is dry and never quite conclusive enough when it comes to the higher things in life.


Logic is often divided into three parts: inductive reasoning, abductive reasoning, and deductive reasoning.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Logic


So it seems to me that this debate can be reduced even further to this:

should we act/live based on emotion or based on logic.

and here's what I say to that statement:

Logic is a tool to help paint a clear picture, Emotion is the color that makes the picture beautiful.

Don't confuse the spice for the meal, its the meal you are eating, the spice just makes it memorable.

I think a lot of how we each decide what is more 'important' or equally important (logic vs feeling/emotion/intuition) is based on our personality type. So, I can't expect my reasoning to be more 'logical' than someone else's feelings just as I can't expect my feelings to be more reasonable than someone else's logic. I like combining both logic and feelings to give my two cents. But, again, that's just my personality type talking.

I feel that plants are closer to 'source' in many ways than the animals. I think they feel in a different way... they are more 'connected', more 'entangled' with everything around them. Like others here, I will not harm/eat animals... I feel they are... too similar to me. I go by my intuition and empathy on that one.

When it comes to surviving here, I need to eat so I choose to eat plants -- not because I think they are 'less important'. Again, it's more of a feeling that says: we're okay if you eat us so long as you are humble and grateful, and sincerely appreciate and thank everything that sacrifices or gives of itself to keep you alive -- that includes all forms of consciousness in combination with the four elements.

Maybe this sounds crazy, but I feel that plants are more... forgiving. It's an 'unconditional love' kind of thing.

My 'logic' and my 'emotion' combined to come up with this point-of-view. For myself, I am happy living within this... ideal.

I agree and I also don't see plants as less important then any other life. Just that my intuition tells me that the perfect and equal to all other sparks of consciousness, spark of life, embodied in a plant, feels less pain and suffering, while embodied that way, then a spark of consciousness embodied in higher emotional vessels like humans or dolphins, or horses. And Every spark of life has the potential to move towards perfected 12 dimensional beings and upwards. I love your mood of giving thanks to the plants you eat :)

Myself, I think that plants feel pain and suffering -- not less than we do -- just differently than we do. Perhaps, they even feel things more intensely than we do because I think they feel/empathize/connect directly with their environment and with other lifeforms within it. There is no separation.

[TargeT]

No apathy or solely heartless logic based decisions allowed :)

Statements like this are at least qualified, but make me think you have some issues with logic that I don't understand.

Logic has nothing to do with emotion, and yet everything.

when cooking asparagus, do you focus on the asparagus or the spices?

would the spices still work with uncooked asparagus?

Why would you separate the two?

The fact that I mostly agree with your statements (though I simply apply my understanding differently) doesn't mean that I am uninterested at how you came to those beliefs / feelings; to me the only way to persuade someone is with solid logic, emotion either "resonates" with something that is already there or it is simply dismissed.

Hopefully you understand that by refining your idea it will be accepted more readily when you offer it to others, that is the main goal in my participation of this thread.

[Pris]

and my comment about "protest noises" is due to my intimate relationships with horses that I have from running a horse rescue (https://www.facebook.com/cruzancowgirlshorserescue) (currently there are 22 horses under our care in various conditions).


My experience with animals... I have heard screaming from pain and suffering (and fear!) that you cannot mistake for anything else... Sometimes the screaming is silent. I can feel it. It is so heartbreaking... I have held animals in my hands when they were in agony and distress, dying... It's something I will never forget... All I could do was pour my love into them... I felt so helpless.

[TargeT]

TargeT ,


vitriolic-bitter, scathing, toxic..

Yeah, some of your comments do feel that way so I stand by that word. But, I also realize this is just a debate..I am glad you have life and passion in your discussions. You did say it yourself, "I'm a bit of a communication nazi"

Respectfully,

Pam


Who I am today is not who I was yesterday.

This inconsistency can be frustrating, but can only be solved if we stop learning and growing; this thread spans months of time, do not hold the current expression of "me" too harshly accountable for the previous, less experienced expressions of "me" that came before...

You may have seen a bit of my emotional body slip loose the limits I've placed on it; generally a rare occurrence for me.

EDIT:

I just reviewed the thread, not that many posts and no toxic, hate or vitriol at all that I could see...

so I'm a bit confused (though honestly I was confused at the start):suspicious:

[Skyhaven]

To me it doesn't feel good eating animals because I know what kind of monotonous, unloving lives they have had in this industrialized society. The animals are here to experience this world just as much as we are. They were meant to roam free just as we are.

Does this mean I'm against eating meat all together? No, Imagine a society where all animals are free to go into nature, or live close to humans in a more friendly manner. Where there's a natural exchange in the things humans can benefit from animals and the other way around. And then finally when the animal is old and dies naturally, it offers its final gift, its body, as a thank you for a nice life. Now this offer I would except...

[Pris]

To me it doesn't feel good eating animals because I know what kind of monotonous, unloving lives they have had in this industrialized society. The animals are here to experience this world just as much as we are. They were meant to roam free just as we are.

Does this mean I'm against eating meat all together? No, Imagine a society where all animals are free to go into nature, or live close to humans in a more friendly manner. Where there's a natural exchange in the things humans can benefit from animals and the other way around. And then finally when the animal is old and dies naturally, it offers its final gift, its body, as a thank you for a nice life. Now this offer I would except...

Unless the animal looks at me and says, "I'm about to croak... if you'd like, go ahead and eat me after I die..."? No, I still wouldn't do it.

This reminds me of a scene from "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: The Restaurant at the End of the Universe".


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h4GAuuBbb3w

[TargeT]

This reminds me of a scene from "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: The Restaurant at the End of the Universe".


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h4GAuuBbb3w

Uhhh...

was that a TV show? That sure seemed like some beautifully executed propaganda.

you see, with out reason, this appeal to emotion (that the video you posted exhibits) matches exactly the logical fallacy it is named for.... (Appeal to emotion).


I often lament at the lack of teaching that modern countries have, the Trivium and Quadrivum (critical thinking, the 7 liberal arts) used to be taught to everyone until the romans took over, the planet has not been the same since.

[Abhaya]

I dono I thought that vid was pretty funny. If anything it shows how people in general need the disconnect from where their food comes from in order to enjoy it without guilt. And unfortunately our society provides that with the greatest precision. It's against the law to even take pics in a slaughter house. We can't let people see! after all then they won't buy the meat!

[Pris]

This reminds me of a scene from "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: The Restaurant at the End of the Universe".


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h4GAuuBbb3w

Uhhh...

was that a TV show? That sure seemed like some beautifully executed propaganda.

you see, with out reason, this appeal to emotion (that the video you posted exhibits) matches exactly the logical fallacy it is named for.... (Appeal to emotion).


I often lament at the lack of teaching that modern countries have, the Trivium and Quadrivum (critical thinking, the 7 liberal arts) used to be taught to everyone until the romans took over, the planet has not been the same since.

I don't quite follow you. You are so very... cerebral. ;)

This is just a scene from 'The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy' based off the hugely popular sci-fi novel. As far as scenes go, this one is by far the most memorable for me. I find it amusing because it is so disturbing. It is so ironic...

[Skyhaven]

To me it doesn't feel good eating animals because I know what kind of monotonous, unloving lives they have had in this industrialized society. The animals are here to experience this world just as much as we are. They were meant to roam free just as we are.

Does this mean I'm against eating meat all together? No, Imagine a society where all animals are free to go into nature, or live close to humans in a more friendly manner. Where there's a natural exchange in the things humans can benefit from animals and the other way around. And then finally when the animal is old and dies naturally, it offers its final gift, its body, as a thank you for a nice life. Now this offer I would except...

Unless the animal looks at me and says, "I'm about to croak... if you'd like, go ahead and eat me after I die..."? No, I still wouldn't do it.

This reminds me of a scene from "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: The Restaurant at the End of the Universe".


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h4GAuuBbb3w

At first it sounds a bit repulsing, especially if you knew the animal, but should we really be repulsed? Isn't this some kind of conditioning? You can choose to put it in the ground and go there once in a while, thinking about what the animal meant to you, or you can absorb and merge with its energy fully, so that the animal becomes literally a part of you...

[TargeT]

This reminds me of a scene from "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy: The Restaurant at the End of the Universe".


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h4GAuuBbb3w

Uhhh...

was that a TV show? That sure seemed like some beautifully executed propaganda.

you see, with out reason, this appeal to emotion (that the video you posted exhibits) matches exactly the logical fallacy it is named for.... (Appeal to emotion).


I often lament at the lack of teaching that modern countries have, the Trivium and Quadrivum (critical thinking, the 7 liberal arts) used to be taught to everyone until the romans took over, the planet has not been the same since.

I don't quite follow you. You are so very... cerebral. ;)

This is just a scene from 'The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy' based off the hugely popular sci-fi novel. As far as scenes go, this one is by far the most memorable for me. I find it amusing because it is so disturbing. It is so ironic...

I'm a huge fan of the book and the movie (real movie) I have no idea what that clip was from, it certainly fits with the British style of humor but the actors are unfamiliar and so is the scene. Basically, I don't recognize it. And you are right, that is a disturbing clip, yet it is very close to what we have done with cattle: Selective breeding to produce the best food/animal.

You should see what they have done here on my island, we have a carefully bred cattle that disease resistant and is both a "beef" and "milk" producer (which is not seen normally); the Senepol (http://www.senepolcattle.com/).

the other bit I was speaking of is the lack of critical thinking education in public schooling, Critical thinking used to be the core of education (and it was split into two parts, first the Trivium, and then the Quadrivium also called the 7 liberal arts (www.triviumeducation.com)).

[Pris]

I'm a huge fan of the book and the movie (real movie) I have no idea what that clip was from, it certainly fits with the British style of humor but the actors are unfamiliar and so is the scene. Basically, I don't recognize it. And you are right, that is a disturbing clip, yet it is very close to what we have done with cattle: Selective breeding to produce the best food/animal.

You should see what they have done here on my island, we have a carefully bred cattle that disease resistant and is both a "beef" and "milk" producer (which is not seen normally); the Senepol (http://www.senepolcattle.com/).

the other bit I was speaking of is the lack of critical thinking education in public schooling, Critical thinking used to be the core of education (and it was split into two parts, first the Trivium, and then the Quadrivium also called the 7 liberal arts (www.triviumeducation.com)).

Yes, of course! It's all very disturbing. This is one reason why I do not eat meat. :p

Ahhh. Critical thinking. Gotcha. :becky:

Btw, here's a link with copy (from the book) from the scene with the cow in 'The Restaurant at the End of the Universe':

http://remotestorage.blogspot.ca/2010/07/douglas-adamss-cow-that-wants-to-be.html

[Pris]

At first it sounds a bit repulsing, especially if you knew the animal, but should we really be repulsed? Isn't this some kind of conditioning? You can choose to put it in the ground and go there once in a while, thinking about what the animal meant to you, or you can absorb and merge with its energy fully, so that the animal becomes literally a part of you...

I just have a funny feeling that eating animal flesh is very baaad for you (on an energetic/vibrational level...). It's kind of like wanting to stick your fingers into the blades of a running fan just to see what will happen even though you know it's probably not a good idea.

[TargeT]

I just have a funny feeling that eating animal flesh is very baaad for you (on an energetic/vibrational level...). It's kind of like wanting to stick your fingers into the blades of a running fan just to see what will happen even though you know it's probably not a good idea.

I'm just baffled that you have this feeling about animals, but not plants. The distinction is completely lost to me and I ASSUME (almost always a bad thing todo) that it is emotion based and HIGHLY influnced by Anthropomorphism (http://psychcentral.com/news/2010/03/01/why-do-we-anthropomorphize/11766.html)

This also is intimently tied to your belief (spiritual or other wise..) in the nature/structure of reality.

Are we all individual life forms with no connection to each other? (we pretty much know this is not the case)

Are we god/source/crist/alah/<your-favorite-diety-name-here> splintered into trillions of pieces here to observe our selves subjectively?

granted these are polarized options, I do recognize the shades of grey in between, but holding either one of those beliefs will influence this topic to a great degree.


I am of the latter persuasion, and have started a thread to help start prove that this IS the case (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?73623-Strange-Computer-Code-Discovered-Concealed-In-Superstring-Equations--Do-we-live-in-a-Matrix--) and not just an opinion.

This theory of reality is widely held, for example here's some music based on it:
VH-8pJrDIsU

so maybe this discussion should really be about the nature of reality, and not the minutia of how we choose to power these meatsuits we use to navigate this game we decided to play.

[Pris]

I just have a funny feeling that eating animal flesh is very baaad for you (on an energetic/vibrational level...). It's kind of like wanting to stick your fingers into the blades of a running fan just to see what will happen even though you know it's probably not a good idea.

I'm just baffled that you have this feeling about animals, but not plants. The distinction is completely lost to me and I ASSUME (almost always a bad thing todo) that it is emotion based and HIGHLY influnced by Anthropomorphism (http://psychcentral.com/news/2010/03/01/why-do-we-anthropomorphize/11766.html)

This also is intimently tied to your belief (spiritual or other wise..) in the nature/structure of reality.

Are we all individual life forms with no connection to each other? (we pretty much know this is not the case)

Are we god/source/crist/alah/<your-favorite-diety-name-here> splintered into trillions of pieces here to observe our selves subjectively?

granted these are polarized options, I do recognize the shades of grey in between, but holding either one of those beliefs will influence this topic to a great degree.


I am of the latter persuasion, and have started a thread to help start prove that this IS the case (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?73623-Strange-Computer-Code-Discovered-Concealed-In-Superstring-Equations--Do-we-live-in-a-Matrix--) and not just an opinion.

This theory of reality is widely held, for example here's some music based on it:
VH-8pJrDIsU

so maybe this discussion should really be about the nature of reality, and not the minutia of how we choose to power these meatsuits we use to navigate this game we decided to play.

Heck yes! Anthropomorphism. Sure, why not. But, I do that to plants and rocks etc., too, so I don't think I'm discriminating.

I just think that plants are more... forgiving. They are closer to 'source' in my opinion. I also think their vibration is higher than ours (as opposed to our densed-down meat-flesh). That is why, if you must eat something, they are probably the better 'choice'.

For myself, I needed to make a choice. And, just from my own experience, having eaten meat, I feel much better for not eating it -- mentally and physically. I am much healthier without meat in my diet. But, I'm sure you don't want me to go into the 'minutia' of that. ;)

Many have said that eating meat seems to interfere with the ability to have OBEs. I pay attention to stuff like that.

We have the intestines of an herbivore.

And, there's monks.

Fruitarianism is interesting. Many plants make fruit that is meant to be eaten so their seeds can get spread around, mixed with compost and so on. That's a nice... relationship.

There's Breatharianism. That's fascinating, but I don't know much about it yet. :)


so maybe this discussion should really be about the nature of reality, and not the minutia of how we choose to power these meatsuits we use to navigate this game we decided to play.

Every time I press a key on my keyboard and I see the 'result' on the computer screen in front of me, I am reminded of this 'nature of reality'.

I'm still not entirely convinced I 'decided' to play this game.

I love minutia. ;)

[TargeT]

Heck yes! Anthropomorphism. Sure, why not. But, I do that to plants and rocks etc., too, so I don't think I'm discriminating.

I just think that plants are more... forgiving. They are closer to 'source' in my opinion. I also think their vibration is higher than ours (as opposed to our densed-down meat-flesh). That is why, if you must eat something, they are probably the better 'choice'.

For myself, I needed to make a choice. And, just from my own experience, having eaten meat, I feel much better for not eating it -- mentally and physically. I am much healthier without meat in my diet. But, I'm sure you don't want me to go into the 'minutia' of that. ;)

Many have said that eating meat seems to interfere with the ability to have OBEs. I pay attention to stuff like that.

Your experience is completely unique to you, I'm glad things are working out for you and will vehemently oppose you (the proverbial you, not directed at anyone in particular) trying to force your experience on others especially if you are using the shame/blame/guilt tactic that often happens with emotion based topics; I have tried through out this entire thread to get some logic/facts non-emotion based information so that the case of veganism can be presented in a non-manipulative way.

If I am correct about the nature of reality, we are an infinitely powerful creative force. If you truly believe something it will happen for you even if it slightly bends the rules of the "game" and this has also been proven over and over via Placebo tests.




We have the intestines of an herbivore.

Says who?

we have the perfect omnivore set up, in fact better than any other omnivore out there, we have the large intestine which is similar to carnivores and a nice long small intestine similar to herbivors, plus the extra length of our tract is much more efficient at drawing out the things we need since we produce hardly any of it on our own (unlike most animals that at least produce a little Vit C etc...)

Anything you've seen on that is pure conjecture, and our closest relatives are omnivores also; seems like that one falls a bit flat.



And, there's monks.

Fruitarianism is interesting. Many plants make fruit that is meant to be eaten so their seeds can get spread around, mixed with compost and so on. That's a nice... relationiship.

There's Breatharianism. That's fascinating, but I don't know much about it yet. :)


so maybe this discussion should really be about the nature of reality, and not the minutia of how we choose to power these meatsuits we use to navigate this game we decided to play.

Every time I press a key on my keyboard and I see the 'result' on the computer screen in front of me, I am reminded of this 'nature of reality'.

I'm still not entirely convinced I 'decided' to play this game.

I love minutia. ;)

the most important part of this game is to forget what we are so we can subjectively learn about ourselves, if that is in fact the case.

[Akasha]

A few years back my partner was baby-sitting two young sisters. They'd just been watching Finding Nemo (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0266543/) and now it was time for tea. She laid out some salmon and veg' for them at which point the parents came back and prompted their older daughter to eat her fish to which she retorted defiantly, "salmon's not a fish!" When her remark had been satisfactorily corrected she became more than a little upset.

One of the reasons I started this thread was because I was thinking about how different we would be as a collective if the parental meat trick had never been played on us.

With the vast majority of children preferring to make friends with what their parents would rather they regarded as dinner, the meat trick is inevitably going to be traumatic once the trivium (there you go, T) has been applied to the situation and there is now no escaping the fact that they have, perhaps for some time, been eating what they would have naturally considered their friends.

What effect does such a horrific realisation have on the mind of the young individual concerned? Is it possible that certain alters are created at the point of such a realisation? Alters that condone what has just happened in an effort to manage the cognitive dissonance which the child is now and possibly for the first time experiencing?

Would that alter come into play later in their lives when they are forced to tolerate, let's say, a multinational's latest display of ecological belligerence or even their nation's aggressive foreign policy?

Perhaps more importantly, would that aggressive foreign policy even be aggressive if the meat trick had never been played?

Maybe I'm wrong to extrapolate like that. I don't know.


BTW thanks to everyone who has contributed so far. This thread is testament to the notion that Avalon can have an ongoing conversation on this kind of subject without it degenerating in to the previously inevitable food fight.

[TargeT]

One of the reasons I started this thread was because I was thinking about how different we would be as a collective if the parental meat trick had never been played on us.


is that a common thing in Hungary? I've never heard of that before; haha, my mom did something similar with me but it was an ice cream/yogurt thing ( she told me for years that yogurt was ice cream, eventually, of course I found out & it did stick with me, that kind of "trickery" / fraud is very hard to get over).

I'm not so sure if bad parenting is solely an issue centered around meat consumption, though I now see that there is some of it.I agree that things would be much different with better parenting, but again; it's far broader than this small subject. (which seems to boil down to: what life your "ok" with ending for "food" purposes)

[Akasha]

One of the reasons I started this thread was because I was thinking about how different we would be as a collective if the parental meat trick had never been played on us.

is that a common thing in Hungary?

Absolutely not! Hungary really likes it's meat.....and has the health statistics to prove it!


I'm not so sure if bad parenting is solely an issue centered around meat consumption, though I now see that there is some of it.I agree that things would be much different with better parenting, but again; it's far broader than this small subject. (which seems to boil down to: what life your "ok" with ending for "food" purposes)

To be clear I'm not suggesting anything about parenting. Most parents love their kids and make decisions with what they consider their best interests at heart.
I appreciate that.

With regard to small subjects, is this (http://www.adaptt.org/killcounter.html) really that small?

[TargeT]

With regard to small subjects, is this (http://www.adaptt.org/killcounter.html) really that small?

yes, yes it's quite small.


In just the licence plates, 3.3 billion bugs are killed per month. The front of the car is at least forty times as large as the surface of the plate. This means that cars hit around 133 billion insects every month. In half a year, that is 800 billion insects.
http://www.treehugger.com/cars/trillions-of-insects-killed-by-cars-every-year-says-study.html
http://www.natuurbericht.nl/?id=6306

that's just from our cars, how many insects kill other instects, how many animals kill other animals every day? Life is constant chaos except where we impose our will and create calmness (usually by killing or dominating everything, "spraying" for bugs, leaving traps for animals or just destroying the larger animal habitats.. we work hard to create peace ( just to mess even that up by fighting with ourselves for one reason or another)).

do you know the kind of impact just having a "house and a yard" is to smaller ecosystems? introducing a foreign species (cat or dog, both predictors) to a setting and giving it unheard of advantages over the native "wild life". Simply by using power you are a part of this, and if you look at nature, it fits the pattern, simply changing the scale of something does not change what it is at its core.

[Akasha]

With regard to small subjects, is this (http://www.adaptt.org/killcounter.html) really that small?

yes, yes it's quite small.


In just the licence plates, 3.3 billion bugs are killed per month. The front of the car is at least forty times as large as the surface of the plate. This means that cars hit around 133 billion insects every month. In half a year, that is 800 billion insects.
http://www.treehugger.com/cars/trillions-of-insects-killed-by-cars-every-year-says-study.html
http://www.natuurbericht.nl/?id=6306....

Whilst the insect death by car figures may be higher, the sheer mass of dead flesh is nowhere near. I guess technically it would be closer to involuntary manslaughter rather than murder at the karmic level...and they died free too if that counts. It's certainly a card which has been played with regard to hunting.

[Pris]

With regard to small subjects, is this (http://www.adaptt.org/killcounter.html) really that small?

yes, yes it's quite small.



This is certainly not a small subject, and thanks for the reminder, Akasha.

[donk]

“Bad parenting” is too general an idea, the problem lies (pun intended) in the “little white lies” we have accepted as being “good” within our culture. This leads to MINDLESS consumption.

If we were taught to think, in this case—what it is we are actually eating, this wouldn’t be an emotionally charged topic.

Calling it “meat” (or even “vegetables”) without qualifying that we are eating living conscious beings is as “bad” in my mind as raising them to believe a magical being comes once a year with loot based on your naughty or niceness…or that a fairy comes and pays you for your teeth. It seems harmless, but is the basis for mindlessly accepting authority’s most outlandish bullsh!t, leading to less conscious life

To TargeT’s point on differentiating the value of life…I have come to a sort of empathy about eating mammals. I feel that as one, I can relate to them, and therefore have more emotional issues of my inability to stop consuming them. I understand that you need to consume life in order to continue yours…and that at a certain level a bug’s life is no less “valuable” than any other, but for my soul, bugs, plants, fish, birds…maybe reptiles, feel like a more soul nourishing “food” to me than the cows and pigs I have grown to love consuming.

I know there is no “right answer” to the dilemma/paradox, but I thinking that thinking about it is important, thanks for the thread. We should really bless our food, be grateful for the sacred life energy that it gives us, whatever it be. Maybe it’s better to not eat “our own”, at least that’s my reality at the moment

[Abhaya]

A few years back my partner was baby-sitting two young sisters. They'd just been watching Finding Nemo (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0266543/) and now it was time for tea. She laid out some salmon and veg' for them at which point the parents came back and prompted their older daughter to eat her fish to which she retorted defiantly, "salmon's not a fish!" When her remark had been satisfactorily corrected she became more than a little upset.

One of the reasons I started this thread was because I was thinking about how different we would be as a collective if the parental meat trick had never been played on us.

With the vast majority of children preferring to make friends with what their parents would rather they regarded as dinner, the meat trick is inevitably going to be traumatic once the trivium (there you go, T) has been applied to the situation and there is now no escaping the fact that they have, perhaps for some time, been eating what they would have naturally considered their friends.

What effect does such a horrific realisation have on the mind of the young individual concerned? Is it possible that certain alters are created at the point of such a realisation? Alters that condone what has just happened in an effort to manage the cognitive dissonance which the child is now and possibly for the first time experiencing?

Would that alter come into play later in their lives when they are forced to tolerate, let's say, a multinational's latest display of ecological belligerence or even their nation's aggressive foreign policy?

Perhaps more importantly, would that aggressive foreign policy even be aggressive if the meat trick had never been played?

Maybe I'm wrong to extrapolate like that. I don't know.


BTW thanks to everyone who has contributed so far. This thread is testament to the notion that Avalon can have an ongoing conversation on this kind of subject without it degenerating in to the previously inevitable food fight.


Very nice. Reminds me of this video, a must watch, as this child brings his mother to tears with such simple feeling/logic that IMO is inherent in most children before it becomes a rational cerebral juggling in our adult minds.

tQIMJ648qgg

[Pris]

Heck yes! Anthropomorphism. Sure, why not. But, I do that to plants and rocks etc., too, so I don't think I'm discriminating.

I just think that plants are more... forgiving. They are closer to 'source' in my opinion. I also think their vibration is higher than ours (as opposed to our densed-down meat-flesh). That is why, if you must eat something, they are probably the better 'choice'.

For myself, I needed to make a choice. And, just from my own experience, having eaten meat, I feel much better for not eating it -- mentally and physically. I am much healthier without meat in my diet. But, I'm sure you don't want me to go into the 'minutia' of that. ;)

Many have said that eating meat seems to interfere with the ability to have OBEs. I pay attention to stuff like that.

Your experience is completely unique to you, I'm glad things are working out for you and will vehemently oppose you (the proverbial you, not directed at anyone in particular) trying to force your experience on others especially if you are using the shame/blame/guilt tactic that often happens with emotion based topics; I have tried through out this entire thread to get some logic/facts non-emotion based information so that the case of veganism can be presented in a non-manipulative way.

The case for veganism has been presented in a non-manipulative way IMO. Perhaps it is you who is allowing emotion to cloud the facts.




We have the intestines of an herbivore.

Says who?

we have the perfect omnivore set up, in fact better than any other omnivore out there, we have the large intestine which is similar to carnivores and a nice long small intestine similar to herbivors, plus the extra length of our tract is much more efficient at drawing out the things we need since we produce hardly any of it on our own (unlike most animals that at least produce a little Vit C etc...)

Anything you've seen on that is pure conjecture, and our closest relatives are omnivores also; seems like that one falls a bit flat.

If we're omnivores, which omnivores cook their meat like we do?

Btw, I don't think McDonald's would be very popular if it served raw meat burgers -- although, I know that there are people that do eat raw meat.

'Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should.' I'm completely convinced we can get by healthfully without eating meat. So, why not? If someone like me has a 'problem' with eating meat for a myriad of valid reasons, what's the beef? What's important is for everyone to make up their own minds from all the information -- including opinions -- that is available.

Back to the topic of the thread, in my experience interacting with people, the ones who care about the welfare of animals are generally more compassionate all around.

[Robin]

I was hesitant to post on this thread for a long while after seeing the conversation take place, but I feel the need to.

How can humans ever come together in unification and evolve to a higher state of being if we cannot come to an agreement on the issue of what is the best food stuff to put into our bodies to create the most sustainable, ethical, healthy, and spiritual way-of-life possible for our existence and evolution?

If we cannot agree on this, then there is no way we will evolve and break the chains from this control structure.

I find it extremely silly that humans think eating animal products is necessary for well-being. Sure, it is one way to exist and to evolve, but it is not the best, quickest, and most efficient way. I truly do think that the word "silly" is the best adjective to apply to omnivores, as the information to suggest eating animal products is not the best route for one to take is astronomical.

I even think that it is silly to have to fully explain this philosophically, ethically, factually, objectively, spiritually, and even provide witness testimonial of E.T. experiencers/contactees.

Avalon is full of the brightest, most aware individuals on this planet, but this subject is still heavily contested. It is contested vehemently, no different than the average human on this planet denying 9/11 being an inside job. How is this the case, and why do people get so emotional and defensive about this?

I think that some people have made the decision a long time ago to include animals as a part of their way-of-life, to the point where they feel that it is too late to admit that they have overlooked the objective nature of veganism being a more efficient way to exist and evolve. Especially for those involved in the Truth movement...they have amassed a huge understanding of the nature of reality to the point where they get angry when compared to the level of an unaware individual. As soon as you say that they are still holding onto a paradigm that has purposely been created to hinder humans, their stubbornness triggers emotions that makes them defend themselves, lest they feel like the person who is unaware in this world.

I know this comment is going to receive a huge backlash, which again, I will think is silly.

[donk]

It's programming, Sam. Program to defend sensual experiences we've learned are the best ones possible. With strong emotional attachment, zero mindfulness.

It's difficult to convince someone to be truly honest and think, even more difficult to convince them thinking differently MIGHT just be "better" for them.

Life's short. Devouring bovine and swine flesh can feel heavenly (especially in the moment, and sometimes even the regret), sucking sauced up poultry off the bone can be divine, relishing the sensation of raw fish in your mouth can be erotic...the instant gratification can only be that wonderful when you're lying to yourself about what actually is you are consuming...not being able to empathize with the "victim", not imagine you could ever be food yourself...

[TargeT]

It's programming, Sam. Program to defend sensual experiences we've learned are the best ones possible. With strong emotional attachment, zero mindfulness.

It's difficult to convince someone to be truly honest and think, even more difficult to convince them thinking differently MIGHT just be "better" for them.

Life's short. Devouring bovine and swine flesh can feel heavenly (especially in the moment, and sometimes even the regret), sucking sauced up poultry off the bone can be divine, relishing the sensation of raw fish in your mouth can be erotic...the instant gratification can only be that wonderful when you're lying to yourself about what actually is you are consuming...not being able to empathize with the "victim", not imagine you could ever be food yourself...

I'll tell you what, the NY strip with bacon and blue cheese crumbles I had to night was MAGNIFICIANT, HEAVENLY! and I still had empathy for the cow that was pulled from the gorgeous 300 acre cattle farm too soon & graced my plate for sustenance. You see Empathy is not Sympathy.


em·pa·thy
ˈempəTHē/Submit
noun
the ability to understand and share the feelings of another.

Aside from knowing what kind of life that cow led, I also know what kind of life he DID NOT lead, he was not fed poison (Corn and Corn by products) to unaturally "marble" his flesh and cause systemic ulceration of the gastrointestinal tract. He did not have to ever feel the fear of a predator stalking the heard and taking out his loved ones (often beginning to consume them immediately). His life did end before cellular failure but his life was lived in a vastly different way than possible outside of the cattle ranch here on this Island.

Cattle as we know it today is vastly different than pre-domestication; think about the power of that 1ton+ animal and the herd mentality meant they always came in numbers.... unfortunately that feral cattle breed almost no longer exists today.

Today cattle are generally in a symbiotic relationship with humans as are much of our food stalk and pet animals.


I empathize completely with the food I eat, I don't sympathize. (http://www.diffen.com/difference/Empathy_vs_Sympathy)

[Akasha]

.....the NY strip with bacon and blue cheese crumbles I had to night was MAGNIFICIANT, HEAVENLY! and I still had empathy for the cow that was pulled from the gorgeous 300 acre cattle farm too soon & graced my plate for sustenance. You see Empathy is not Sympathy.


em·pa·thy
ˈempəTHē/Submit
noun
the ability to understand and share the feelings of another.



How are you able to "share the feelings" of that which is being slaughtered without actually being slaughtered yourself?

[TargeT]

How are you able to "share the feelings" of that which is being slaughtered without actually being slaughtered yourself?

A stunbolt gun (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Captive_bolt_pistol) causes a complete loss of consciousness instantly before slaughter. I too have been "knocked unconscious" though mine was a bit more brutal as it was done with fists and knees and took more than 1 quick strike.

[Pris]

How are you able to "share the feelings" of that which is being slaughtered without actually being slaughtered yourself?

A stunbolt gun (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Captive_bolt_pistol) causes a complete loss of consciousness instantly before slaughter. I too have been "knocked unconscious" though mine was a bit more brutal as it was done with fists and knees and took more than 1 quick strike.

How often does this 'technique' work exactly as intended? Where there is death, animals sense it, and they will feel fear.

How does one define 'ideal conditions' for pre-slaughter? How is killing deliberately on any level -- in particular for food purposes -- considered 'humane'?

I want to live and do not want to be killed.

Empathy... is lacking here.

[TargeT]

How often does this 'technique' work exactly as intended? Where there is death, animals sense it, and they will feel fear.

How does one define 'ideal conditions' for pre-slaughter? How is killing deliberately on any level -- in particular for food purposes -- considered 'humane'?



Nothing is perfect, that's for sure; and if you are speaking of large scale slaughter houses that are the trade mark of big agriculture, then I agree; those places are terrible.



I want to live and do not want to be killed.

Empathy... is lacking here.

Yeah? because I don't ignore the BILLIONS of LIVING creatures that die every day, a lot of the statements I see in this thread seem to indicate that their authors have just categorized life in nice little boxes, and if your too small or not cute enough you are no longer "alive" and there for you living or dieing is irrelevant.

I like to take a look at the bigger picture and realize the intricate dance we living things act out with each other, how we are all interconnected and how all life is precious and rare, even those some choose to callously end (or gratefully end).

My compassion and empathy encompass the plants, insects and other forms of life that are disturbed (and some times terminated) due to my existence.


the view point that only certain animals "need apply" to compassion and empathy seems very hypocritical and, well very human; especially when you throw stones at someone else's house because they didn't agree to a strange view of the world.




Life is either precious (and it is) or its not, there's really little to no room for a middle ground on this topic.

[Abhaya]

I am beginning to think that this subject as a rational debate is actually hopeless. A seemingly better argument can be placed one after another on either side of the debate endlessly. That is the problem with logic when it comes to matters of the heart it is always inconclusive. This back and forth will maybe only make observers decide that there is no way to know how to really live and eat kinder and possibly lead to apathy in their eating choices due to the logical conundrum.
I think the only way to spread this ideology successfully is to neutrally put out the truth about where our food comes from and how animals suffer and to know that for those who are attuned to the message it will strike a cord in their heart. I for one can say that's how I converted. It wasn't someone defeating my logic and me giving in. I saw the truth of the suffering and my inner being knew with out a doubt that I wanted not to do with that. I leapt towards that idea when I heard it. Others I'm sure had similar experiences. Almost like remembering a pattern from a past life even. Others this will not resonate with at this time and that's ok it cannot be forced and maybe they will go down this road later or maybe they are going a different way in that respect that's ok to. We all have our paths.

[Skyhaven]

I am beginning to think that this subject as a rational debate is actually hopeless. A seemingly better argument can be placed one after another on either side of the debate endlessly. That is the problem with logic when it comes to matters of the heart it is always inconclusive. This back and forth will maybe only make observers decide that there is no way to know how to really live and eat kinder and possibly lead to apathy in their eating choices due to the logical conundrum.
I think the only way to spread this ideology successfully is to neutrally put out the truth about where our food comes from and how animals suffer and to know that for those who are attuned to the message it will strike a cord in their heart. I for one can say that's how I converted. It wasn't someone defeating my logic and me giving in. I saw the truth of the suffering and my inner being knew with out a doubt that I wanted not to do with that. I leapt towards that idea when I heard it. Others I'm sure had similar experiences. Almost like remembering a pattern from a past life even. Others this will not resonate with at this time and that's ok it cannot be forced and maybe they will go down this road later or maybe they are going a different way in that respect that's ok to. We all have our paths.

My thoughts exactly: this is a matter of the heart for me, not a matter of logic.

[Abhaya]

I think more feeling images of animals showing emotion. Inspirational stories of health benefits for a vegan diet. Sad stories of animals and their slaughter house fates. These kinds of messages need to be continually put out (in a non argumentative non blaming way) as the slaughter industry would surely like them suppressed. So that those who are waiting to and ready for this knowledge will have the opportunity to hear it.

Note all these vids are extremely short so they won't take up much of your time. I hope others can add some of their favorites too.

4-KWmaOIDZI

I'll start it off with this smart little guy. I think that some will be apposed to looking at videos like these at all others will be curious and others it will resonate deeply with them. Good to have it out there either way for those who are just waiting to make the change even if they don't fully know it yet :)

HZNQdu0BhI8

These cows are so peaceful in this video.

P8ghfObrzoQ

Not so different from cuddling up to our own loved ones is it :)

ucHEVNX2c9o

Amazing health transformations and even super athlete on a vegan diet


LHNC78zy1SI

And finally a glimpse at the hard truth that the big corp slaughter literally tries to make illegal for us to see

kUZ1YLhIAg8
Well can't end with that sad video, check out these happy emotional guys like kids getting let out on the last day of school before summer vacation. Saved the best for last trust me.

[Pris]

I want to live and do not want to be killed.

Empathy... is lacking here.

Yeah? because I don't ignore the BILLIONS of LIVING creatures that die every day, a lot of the statements I see in this thread seem to indicate that their authors have just categorized life in nice little boxes, and if your too small or not cute enough you are no longer "alive" and there for you living or dieing is irrelevant.

I have in no way indicated by my statement that I love or care any less for smaller, less 'cute' animals. I love and care for the bugs and the birds to the fish in the sea, to plants and all forms of life -- from the microscopic to the macroscopic. My feelings of love and care are not limited to what we may consider 'life forms'. I love and care for earth, air, fire, water, and 'ether'.

Everyday I become more conscious and grateful for my connection with everything. I do what I can to minimize what I consider to be any kind of negative impact I may have upon my surroundings. At the same time, I strive to be as positive an element as possible.

[Akasha]

How are you able to "share the feelings" of that which is being slaughtered without actually being slaughtered yourself?

A stunbolt gun (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Captive_bolt_pistol) causes a complete loss of consciousness instantly before slaughter. I too have been "knocked unconscious" though mine was a bit more brutal as it was done with fists and knees and took more than 1 quick strike.

So what you're saying is you can empathize up to the point of being knocked out. Ok. That's certainly further down Empathy Road than many would care to venture I suppose. Once you're happy to be hung upside down and have your jugular severed too, you'll be there, right?

[TargeT]

So what you're saying is you can empathize up to the point of being knocked out. Ok. That's certainly further down Empathy Road than many would care to venture I suppose. Once you're happy to be hung upside down and have your jugular severed too, you'll be there, right?

I understand that part about as much as I understand the birth process for mothers (I have 6 children.....).

it looks like the understanding has been reached, Veganism is completely illogical and emotion based (aka heart based) it ignores most life forms in favor of the few that can put up a cute video or have soft eyes.


Some of the most vicious killers in the world are cute and cuddly too, yet any one of those "cute cows" posted above would brutally be killed and consumed by these cute furry animals.
ZRd3lrukxu8


Here's what I say:

If your belief is valid and true, it WILL be found to be right by those who you want to impose it on, let them come to it on their own.

or at least leave it at something along the lines of:

"this is how I eat because I feel its more inline with how I want to live"

if you go beyond that into shame/blame/guilt (which seems to happen frequently) it is no longer a positive message and your audience will see through your manipulative statements.

I'm going to pattern my life after nature, since that really seems to be where all the answers are (even when they are sometimes brutal).



Everyday I become more conscious and grateful for my connection with everything. I do what I can to minimize what I consider to be any kind of negative impact I may have upon my surroundings. At the same time, I strive to be as positive an element as possible.

Great statement! I feel the same way.

[Abhaya]

it looks like the understanding has been reached, Veganism is completely illogical and emotion based

Well I wouldn't go that far. In fact when it comes to the logical debates I find the vegans are almost always wiping the floor with those who indorse meat eating. That being said the potential for logical inconclusive back and forth on this subject may exist. And you do better then most at taking a stab at it. :). Point is I think we need to appeal to people's hearts more then they're minds on this issue. The heart finds this ideology easy to hold on to while the mind by with its addictive nature fights it.

[TargeT]

The heart finds this ideology easy to hold on to while the mind by with its addictive nature fights it.

I think it has much more to do with (and this isn't a very accurate term) the "strongly held belief" syndrome (I don't think it's an actual syndrome either...).

This phenomenon is described in the first 5 min of this video (though the whole video is a master piece, I've probably watched it 30 or so times, I probably mostly understood it on the 10th full watch through).

dbh5l0b2-0o

so you see, the old saying " you can lead a horse to water, but if it doesn't like water it's going to trample you via built in fight/flight mechanisms" is proven true (whats that you say? that's not an old saying??)

Watch this video then see how motivated you are to try and change someones mind on a strongly held belief (see if you can spot what is described in your OWN actions, that's the most powerful way to use this info).


the water will be drank when the future drinker is ready; and not before.

[Akasha]

So what you're saying is you can empathize up to the point of being knocked out. Ok. That's certainly further down Empathy Road than many would care to venture I suppose. Once you're happy to be hung upside down and have your jugular severed too, you'll be there, right?

I understand that part about as much as I understand the birth process for mothers (I have 6 children.....).

Really? You don't understand the above? Ok, you were saying you empathized. I was suggesting your empathy could go further.


it looks like the understanding has been reached, Veganism is completely illogical and emotion based (aka heart based) it ignores most life forms in favor of the few that can put up a cute video or have soft eyes.

On the contrary, from a health POV, the vegan diet is the most appropriate for longevity and the antidote for those suffering from the effects of the S.A.D diet, not to mention eliminating the suffering of countless animals across the globe.



Some of the most vicious killers in the world are cute and cuddly too, yet any one of those "cute cows" posted above would brutally be killed and consumed by these cute furry animals.
ZRd3lrukxu8

The thread was aimed at humans, not big cats.



Here's what I say:

If your belief is valid and true, it WILL be found to be right by those who you want to impose it on, let them come to it on their own.

I didn't come to it on my own. I was made aware of it by others and am deeply grateful for all their hard, tireless work on the subject and it is with that in mind that I continue to put it out there for the sake of others like myself. This thread has had almost 10 000 views so far and that's just Avalon members. Not a massive number I know but it's better than nothing and may well have contributed to some folk transitioning to a plant based diet.




if you go beyond that into shame/blame/guilt (which seems to happen frequently) it is no longer a positive message and your audience will see through your manipulative statements.

Agreed. I hope I haven't played those cards. If I have, I apologize. The Sun is always more effective than the wind at removing the proverbial jacket.


I'm going to pattern my life after nature, since that really seems to be where all the answers are (even when they are sometimes brutal).
When the developing nations can afford a similar diet, which will be soon, brutal won't be the word!



Everyday I become more conscious and grateful for my connection with everything. I do what I can to minimize what I consider to be any kind of negative impact I may have upon my surroundings. At the same time, I strive to be as positive an element as possible.


Great statement! I feel the same way.

Once again, agreed! Pris's statement encapsulates what I have so far failed to share and I appreciate her eloquence. Thank you, Pris!

[Abhaya]

Will have to watch that later tonight.

Here is a something interesting I was just thinking about though. Might stir up some reaction but I'll risk it. If we take America for example, we see that in the habits of those who are the most plugged into the system, guys who are only concerned with the next football game and are ready to get those darn terrorists, these people in 99% of the cases eat a heavy meat based diet. On the contrast amongst vegetarians in the United States,the percentage of them that are "fully plugged into the matrix" is far smaller then those that are awake and aware and alternative to some degree. Now of course this forum is testimount to the fact that you can eat meat and still be awake aware and spiritual, however the fact that the spiritually, emotionally, logically, darkest and densest in our society eat a heavy meat based diet in 99% of the cases maybe make a case for that diet being at least less conducive to our advancement in personal and spiritual matters. This can be refuted logically on some grounds I'm sure. But there is some undeniable truth here for sure I feel.

[TargeT]

Will have to watch that later tonight.

Here is a something interesting I was just thinking about though. Might stir up some reaction but I'll risk it. If we take America for example, we see that in the habits of those who are the most plugged into the system, guys who are only concerned with the next football game and are ready to get those darn terrorists, these people in 99% of the cases eat a heavy meat based diet. On the contrast amongst vegetarians in the United States,the percentage of them that are "fully plugged into the matrix" is far smaller then those that are awake and aware and alternative to some degree. Now of course this forum is testimount to the fact that you can eat meat and still be awake aware and spiritual, however the fact that the spiritually, emotionally, logically, darkest and densest in our society eat a heavy meat based diet in 99% of the cases maybe make a case for that diet being at least less conducive to our advancement in personal and spiritual matters. This can be refuted logically on some grounds I'm sure. But there is some undeniable truth here for sure I feel.

I don't think what you are getting at holds true in any significant way unfortunately. There are a lot of dirtbag vegans because there is a whole subset of society offered for them to cling to (much like the meat eating foot ball watcher).

It's like roles are demonstrated in society and people will gravitate to them, but most of them are shallow and self defeating over the long run, be it the beer swilling meat eating foot ball watcher or the birkenstocks wearing holier-than-thou vegan.

[Abhaya]

Pride is a hard thing to over come. Maybe one of the last hurdles we manage to get over. So that prideful vegan may be overly proud of his efforts in creating a smaller carbon footprint. But if we weigh that offense against the total apathy of our societies sheeple there is no comparison.

[Abhaya]

Will have to watch that later tonight.

Here is a something interesting I was just thinking about though. Might stir up some reaction but I'll risk it. If we take America for example, we see that in the habits of those who are the most plugged into the system, guys who are only concerned with the next football game and are ready to get those darn terrorists, these people in 99% of the cases eat a heavy meat based diet. On the contrast amongst vegetarians in the United States,the percentage of them that are "fully plugged into the matrix" is far smaller then those that are awake and aware and alternative to some degree. Now of course this forum is testimount to the fact that you can eat meat and still be awake aware and spiritual, however the fact that the spiritually, emotionally, logically, darkest and densest in our society eat a heavy meat based diet in 99% of the cases maybe make a case for that diet being at least less conducive to our advancement in personal and spiritual matters. This can be refuted logically on some grounds I'm sure. But there is some undeniable truth here for sure I feel.

I don't think what you are getting at holds true in any significant way unfortunately. There are a lot of dirtbag vegans because there is a whole subset of society offered for them to cling to (much like the meat eating foot ball watcher).

It's like roles are demonstrated in society and people will gravitate to them, but most of them are shallow and self defeating over the long run, be it the beer swilling meat eating foot ball watcher or the birkenstocks wearing holier-than-thou vegan.

So I guess you are saying that one needs to be detached from any of societies programmed cliques in order to be really getting any where. I will give you some credit there. That makes me think of another comparison however to back up my point. If we take the global percentage of vegetarians vs meat eaters vegetarians are at I think only 5 or ten percent, vegans at 2 percent. Now if we make that same comparison amongst those that have really detached them selves from the ego inflating cliques in society we would see a much much smaller gap amongst the two groups. So again perhaps a case for the diet being more conducive to pulling that plug :)

[Akasha]

......the birkenstocks wearing holier-than-thou vegan.....

A "Birkenstocks wearing holier-than-thou vegan" would certainly be self-defeating and technically not a vegan since Birkenstocks traditionally utilize leather in their construction :p .

[Akasha]

I just checked out ktlight's latest thread with Lenon Honor on the Gnostic Media podcast (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?74867-Lenon-Honor-9-11-Cyclical-Fear-Based-Mind-Control-in-the-Media--) and it reminded me of an older video he'd done regarding his transition to a plant based diet. Here it is:

G6alvT-2RLA

[Akasha]

Stroke of luck - the following short was in the side-bar of the Lenon Honor video. Moby steps up to the plate and shares his experience of being a vegan:

NUJwRTvwadY

[Akasha]

MRSA Superbugs in Meat

This is a very direct and tangible application of the thread title. Our antibiotic treatment of animals is undermining the effectiveness of our antibiotic treatment of one other.

"Washing of hands after touching raw pork is advised":

dkHL7g3KxVQ

[Pam]

I was hesitant to post on this thread for a long while after seeing the conversation take place, but I feel the need to.

How can humans ever come together in unification and evolve to a higher state of being if we cannot come to an agreement on the issue of what is the best food stuff to put into our bodies to create the most sustainable, ethical, healthy, and spiritual way-of-life possible for our existence and evolution?

If we cannot agree on this, then there is no way we will evolve and break the chains from this control structure.

I find it extremely silly that humans think eating animal products is necessary for well-being. Sure, it is one way to exist and to evolve, but it is not the best, quickest, and most efficient way. I truly do think that the word "silly" is the best adjective to apply to omnivores, as the information to suggest eating animal products is not the best route for one to take is astronomical.

I even think that it is silly to have to fully explain this philosophically, ethically, factually, objectively, spiritually, and even provide witness testimonial of E.T. experiencers/contactees.

Avalon is full of the brightest, most aware individuals on this planet, but this subject is still heavily contested. It is contested vehemently, no different than the average human on this planet denying 9/11 being an inside job. How is this the case, and why do people get so emotional and defensive about this?

I think that some people have made the decision a long time ago to include animals as a part of their way-of-life, to the point where they feel that it is too late to admit that they have overlooked the objective nature of veganism being a more efficient way to exist and evolve. Especially for those involved in the Truth movement...they have amassed a huge understanding of the nature of reality to the point where they get angry when compared to the level of an unaware individual. As soon as you say that they are still holding onto a paradigm that has purposely been created to hinder humans, their stubbornness triggers emotions that makes them defend themselves, lest they feel like the person who is unaware in this world.

I know this comment is going to receive a huge backlash, which again, I will think is silly.

Beautifully stated Sam the Wise. In my case it was my young daughter that brought me to the light so to speak. We were driving down the road in a rural area. She saw a truck load of chickens on their way to slaughter. One in particular caught her eye with his little head sticking out the side of the cage. She was just blown away that this is where 'chicken' comes from. She never ate meat again. Up until that point I have to admit I had just been putting my head in the sand. I was too weak to live the life that I knew was right for me.It was the stand that a small child took that taught me to have the fortitude to live my beliefs.

[Freed Fox]

Three weeks vegetarian now, and thinking about ways to encourage others in my life to follow suite.

I hope none of you mind my jumping into this thread so far in. However, I no longer need be convinced myself, one way or the other; I am content in my personal choice. I did want to offer this in case it may help some of you, whom I appreciate and respect for taking up a controversial but nevertheless important cause.

My current approach is based on what worked for me; for years I had felt guilty about eating meat, but always managed to either justify it or ignore the feeling for sake of convenience/taste/what-have-you. Guilt alone was insufficient to move me. When I did finally make the switch (giving it up entirely, from that day on) the impetus behind that commitment was essentially compassion.

What the above lead me to believe is that change and/or sacrifice are more likely to happen when the motivation comes from a positive emotional source (empathy) rather than a negative one (guilt).

Not necessarily a revelation to anyone of course, just reporting from my present angle, for what it's worth.

[Pam]

Three weeks vegetarian now, and thinking about ways to encourage others in my life to follow suite.

I hope none of you mind my jumping into this thread so far in. However, I no longer need be convinced myself, one way or the other; I am content in my personal choice. I did want to offer this in case it may help some of you, whom I appreciate and respect for taking up a controversial but nevertheless important cause.

My current approach is based on what worked for me; for years I had felt guilty about eating meat, but always managed to either justify it or ignore the feeling for sake of convenience/taste/what-have-you. Guilt alone was insufficient to move me. When I did finally make the switch (giving it up entirely, from that day on) the impetus behind that commitment was essentially compassion.

What the above lead me to believe is that change and/or sacrifice are more likely to happen when the motivation comes from a positive emotional source (empathy) rather than a negative one (guilt).

Not necessarily a revelation to anyone of course, just reporting from my present angle, for what it's worth.


Freed Fox, Thank you for making my day with your heartfelt post. I so understand the process you explained on your journey to becoming a vegetarian. I too went through the guilt, justification and the ignoring of this aspect of my life where I knew I was falling short. I knew that for me, eating meat was wrong. I did not have the courage to kill an animal or even think about an animal being slaughtered ,yet I was going to the grocery store with my blinders on and buying meat. As I stated in an earlier post, it was the conviction of my daughter to live in integrity with her personal feelings that showed me that I too can muster the strength to live the life I have imagined for myself.

I think you will be pleasantly surprised at how your body will respond to this change, which is an added benefit. Again, I want to thank you for being so open and honest here, I know it is not easy, but rest assured your heartfelt message has been deeply appreciated.

Pam

[jackovesk]

Does Our Treatment of Animals Affect How We Treat Each Other?

Only small thing that is going to ((BUG-ME)) til the day I die...:yes4:

What's this "Our" Business...:confused:

Its just a ((PET-HATE)) of mine (pardon the pun), when people point the finger right-back onto those that have never harmed and animal in their life...!!!

Generalising the ((OUR)) is not the way to tackle the issue IMHO...:nono:

((NOT GUILTY)) your Honor...:nono:

I am (NOT & NEVER) will be part of any form of ((COLLECTIVISM))...:nono:

PS - I'm an ((INDIVIDUAL)) you can't ((FOOL ME)) Jacko...:neo:


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g0Q5JFHrGNk

[donk]

It's nice to share though. You grow by learning from the "our", whether it is a for real entity or not.

Just wanted to thank you for the thread Akasha, I enjoy it and find a lot of value in it and am glad it still has life here, I've been using it as an example of how we grow as a community (hope you don't mind!)

[Pris]

Three weeks vegetarian now, and thinking about ways to encourage others in my life to follow suite.

I hope none of you mind my jumping into this thread so far in. However, I no longer need be convinced myself, one way or the other; I am content in my personal choice. I did want to offer this in case it may help some of you, whom I appreciate and respect for taking up a controversial but nevertheless important cause.

My current approach is based on what worked for me; for years I had felt guilty about eating meat, but always managed to either justify it or ignore the feeling for sake of convenience/taste/what-have-you. Guilt alone was insufficient to move me. When I did finally make the switch (giving it up entirely, from that day on) the impetus behind that commitment was essentially compassion.

What the above lead me to believe is that change and/or sacrifice are more likely to happen when the motivation comes from a positive emotional source (empathy) rather than a negative one (guilt).

Not necessarily a revelation to anyone of course, just reporting from my present angle, for what it's worth.

Good for you! :biggrin1: Your present angle is worth a lot IMO.

I don't know if this interests you, but it took me a long time to finally become vegetarian let alone vegan. It took me many, many years. I'd be vegetarian for awhile, then I'd 'fall off the wagon' and eat meat again. Back and forth this went. But, what was interesting was as the years went by, the less and less meat I ate. And, the less meat I ate, the less cravings/desire I'd have for it.

Part of the problem over the years has been trying to find places to eat at that cater to being vegetarian or vegan. [Who knows what cross-contamination means? Please raise your hand! :wave:] In other words, eating out became so problematic, I hardly do it anymore. I had to give up one lifestyle (which included socializing with people) for another and sometimes you really do feel deprived.

It wasn't 'just' the meat that was a challenge to give up, it was the dairy products/animal products. I also stopped drinking coffee, black tea, alcohol and pop. And, then I began eliminating foods with high fructose corn syrup, Canola oil, palm kernel and cottonseed oil, sugar, MSG, words you can't pronounce... I cut out soya and corn products as much as possible (mostly to avoid GMOs). And, I cut out margarine. The list goes on and on. I pay attention to those number codes on produce that most people ignore (what's irradiated, what's conventionally farmed, what's organic, what's a GMO) It's already challenging enough being a vegan in this world and I had to go and up the ante! Despite all the hardships, I don't look back.

For me, I've always felt that eating animals and animal products wasn't right (because I love and care about animals, for goodness sake!), so with regards to that, I'm finally living authentically. Phew! :biggrin1:

[Pam]

Three weeks vegetarian now, and thinking about ways to encourage others in my life to follow suite.

I hope none of you mind my jumping into this thread so far in. However, I no longer need be convinced myself, one way or the other; I am content in my personal choice. I did want to offer this in case it may help some of you, whom I appreciate and respect for taking up a controversial but nevertheless important cause.

My current approach is based on what worked for me; for years I had felt guilty about eating meat, but always managed to either justify it or ignore the feeling for sake of convenience/taste/what-have-you. Guilt alone was insufficient to move me. When I did finally make the switch (giving it up entirely, from that day on) the impetus behind that commitment was essentially compassion.

What the above lead me to believe is that change and/or sacrifice are more likely to happen when the motivation comes from a positive emotional source (empathy) rather than a negative one (guilt).

Not necessarily a revelation to anyone of course, just reporting from my present angle, for what it's worth.

Good for you! :biggrin1: Your present angle is worth a lot IMO.

I don't know if this interests you, but it took me a long time to finally become vegetarian let alone vegan. It took me many, many years. I'd be vegetarian for awhile, then I'd 'fall off the wagon' and eat meat again. Back and forth this went. But, what was interesting was as the years went by, the less and less meat I ate. And, the less meat I ate, the less cravings/desire I'd have for it.

Part of the problem over the years has been trying to find places to eat at that cater to being vegetarian or vegan. [Who knows what cross-contamination means? Please raise your hand! :wave:] In other words, eating out became so problematic, I hardly do it anymore. I had to give up one lifestyle (which included socializing with people) for another and sometimes you really do feel deprived.

It wasn't 'just' the meat that was a challenge to give up, it was the dairy products/animal products. I also stopped drinking coffee, black tea, alcohol and pop. And, then I began eliminating foods with high fructose corn syrup, Canola oil, palm kernel and cottonseed oil, sugar, MSG, words you can't pronounce... I cut out soya and corn products as much as possible (mostly to avoid GMOs). And, I cut out margarine. The list goes on and on. I pay attention to those number codes on produce that most people ignore (what's irradiated, what's conventionally farmed, what's organic, what's a GMO) It's already challenging enough being a vegan in this world and I had to go and up the ante! Despite all the hardships, I don't look back.

For me, I've always felt that eating animals and animal products wasn't right (because I love and care about animals, for goodness sake!), so with regards to that, I'm finally living authentically. Phew! :biggrin1:



Pris, I do find your story interesting, and as I am still refining my diet, I have a lot of admiration for your discipline. What I do find really true is that one can still eat poorly and not eat animal products. When I do this, my body wants to get back to healthy, vibrant food. I also want to say that I have found you to be a wonderfully refreshing addition to PA. I thoroughly enjoy your comments on any topic.

[Akasha]

It's nice to share though. You grow by learning from the "our", whether it is a for real entity or not.

Just wanted to thank you for the thread Akasha, I enjoy it and find a lot of value in it and am glad it still has life here, I've been using it as an example of how we grow as a community (hope you don't mind!)

Mind??? Of course not!!! It's a pleasure and a privilege to have it referenced in this context. I'm reminded of many posts on similar threads which advised the avoidance of the subject entirely. Whilst that strategy may well have resulted in less inflammation I'm not sure it would have resulted in the growth of the community as you observe it.

Personally, it's been and continues to be a steep learning curve in self-control but nevertheless an invaluable one.

[Akasha]

Does Our Treatment of Animals Affect How We Treat Each Other?

Only small thing that is going to ((BUG-ME)) til the day I die...:yes4:

What's this "Our" Business...:confused:

Its just a ((PET-HATE)) of mine (pardon the pun), when people point the finger right-back onto those that have never harmed and animal in their life...!!!

Generalising the ((OUR)) is not the way to tackle the issue IMHO...:nono:

((NOT GUILTY)) your Honor...:nono:

I am (NOT & NEVER) will be part of any form of ((COLLECTIVISM))...:nono:

PS - I'm an ((INDIVIDUAL)) you can't ((FOOL ME)) Jacko...:neo:

I'll be the first to admit the thread title is less than ideal given the subject matter but I was trying to encompass the essence of the OP quotes as they struck me in the form of a catchy question. Evidently I was less than successful and I apologise for that. I certainly don't want to undermine your individuality.

Since you highlighted the issue and considering your extensive experience composing thread titles - what would you have called it (if you don't mind me asking)?

[donk]

I personally like what it's called, think it's a valid direction...especially cuz I want to bring pets in the mix, I'm still working on it though. My vote is no change in title...

[Pris]

Three weeks vegetarian now, and thinking about ways to encourage others in my life to follow suite.

I hope none of you mind my jumping into this thread so far in. However, I no longer need be convinced myself, one way or the other; I am content in my personal choice. I did want to offer this in case it may help some of you, whom I appreciate and respect for taking up a controversial but nevertheless important cause.

My current approach is based on what worked for me; for years I had felt guilty about eating meat, but always managed to either justify it or ignore the feeling for sake of convenience/taste/what-have-you. Guilt alone was insufficient to move me. When I did finally make the switch (giving it up entirely, from that day on) the impetus behind that commitment was essentially compassion.

What the above lead me to believe is that change and/or sacrifice are more likely to happen when the motivation comes from a positive emotional source (empathy) rather than a negative one (guilt).

Not necessarily a revelation to anyone of course, just reporting from my present angle, for what it's worth.

Good for you! :biggrin1: Your present angle is worth a lot IMO.

I don't know if this interests you, but it took me a long time to finally become vegetarian let alone vegan. It took me many, many years. I'd be vegetarian for awhile, then I'd 'fall off the wagon' and eat meat again. Back and forth this went. But, what was interesting was as the years went by, the less and less meat I ate. And, the less meat I ate, the less cravings/desire I'd have for it.

Part of the problem over the years has been trying to find places to eat at that cater to being vegetarian or vegan. [Who knows what cross-contamination means? Please raise your hand! :wave:] In other words, eating out became so problematic, I hardly do it anymore. I had to give up one lifestyle (which included socializing with people) for another and sometimes you really do feel deprived.

It wasn't 'just' the meat that was a challenge to give up, it was the dairy products/animal products. I also stopped drinking coffee, black tea, alcohol and pop. And, then I began eliminating foods with high fructose corn syrup, Canola oil, palm kernel and cottonseed oil, sugar, MSG, words you can't pronounce... I cut out soya and corn products as much as possible (mostly to avoid GMOs). And, I cut out margarine. The list goes on and on. I pay attention to those number codes on produce that most people ignore (what's irradiated, what's conventionally farmed, what's organic, what's a GMO) It's already challenging enough being a vegan in this world and I had to go and up the ante! Despite all the hardships, I don't look back.

For me, I've always felt that eating animals and animal products wasn't right (because I love and care about animals, for goodness sake!), so with regards to that, I'm finally living authentically. Phew! :biggrin1:



Pris, I do find your story interesting, and as I am still refining my diet, I have a lot of admiration for your discipline. What I do find really true is that one can still eat poorly and not eat animal products. When I do this, my body wants to get back to healthy, vibrant food. I also want to say that I have found you to be a wonderfully refreshing addition to PA. I thoroughly enjoy your comments on any topic.

My goodness! :o Thank you, peterpam. It's wonderful to get such kind feedback like this and I really do appreciate it.

And, I want to thank you for sharing your thoughts as well!

Yes, absolutely -- being vegetarian or vegan doesn't mean you're eating well that's for sure haha! ;) And, despite all my discipline, I still do not eat nearly enough raw fruits and veggies. There is still so much room for improvement. I don't expect I'll ever get it 'right'. But, that's okay. At least I've got some momentum now. :bowl:

[Pam]

I was not familiar with Lenon Honor but it is really an uplifting experience listening to him. I love what he says about being vegan, vegetarian, or really anything for that matter, it is the process that is of primary significance. How do I let the process transform me, rather than focusing on the outcome only. Does the process lead me to the life I have envisioned for myself? I guess he is saying to honor the process of transformation rather than gaining a new identity, ie I am ????.

I think when this is tied in with how we treat animals, the motivation that initiates the process can evolve over time as the body and mind are cleansed from the vibration of meat and hopefully, the reduction of toxins. In other words, one could become vegetarian for health reasons and vibrational changes that may occur may transmute that motivation to one of respecting all sentient beings.

[Robin]

I just couldn't resist sharing...;)

27493

[Pam]

SamTheBrave, I love this cartoon. Particularly the one that says," God gave us dominion over them so that means we can murder them and use them as we please". Its funny, that if we weren't forced to see that we are those aliens we would find them a repulsive, despicable lot.

[Pris]

This is from another thread... thought I'd re-post it here... seems very appropriate.



Diabolo became Spirit

Timely. And very well understood. Thank you, Houman ~

The full video is at
http://vimeo.com/94709579






Diabolo became Spirit

Timely. And very well understood. Thank you, Houman ~

Yes indeed. Powerfull.

I agree. Powerful indeed. Thank you for this, Houman.

This brought tears to my eyes. Beautiful. From me too, thank you.


The Animal Communicator Anna Breytenbach Documentary Film (http://vimeo.com/94709579)

[heyokah]

In the following podcast, Mark Passio delves deep into the subject of carnism. He spells out why it is, in fact, a religion as well as making the link between the phenomenon and global enslavement, given the unavoidable effects of natural law.

http://www.whatonearthishappening.com/podcasts/WOEIH-121.mp3 (http://www.whatonearthishappening.com/podcasts/WOEIH-121.mp3)

NB: fast forward to 22.45 for the presentation.

Since there has been practically zero feedback regarding the above podcast, and given it's groundbreaking content, I'm going to assume it was just lost in the sea of other threads and therefore give it a :bump2:.

I would also encourage folk to listen to podcast 122 (http://www.whatonearthishappening.com/podcasts/WOEIH-122.mp3) and podcast 123 (http://www.whatonearthishappening.com/podcasts/WOEIH-123.mp3) in which Mark Passio elaborates further on the subject.

Accompanying images, documents and videos of the podcasts can be found on his actual podcasts page (http://www.whatonearthishappening.com/podcast) below the relevant podcast link.

I appreciate that for many this subject is a tough pill to swallow, but try and get it down anyway. You can always bring it up again if it really disagrees with you :).

Maybe this will help.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xalIRBqZwlc

[Akasha]

even plants have feelings



A polygraph machine has been used to record emotions from plants. When a tomato is plucked off the plant, the plant cries. When a carrot is pulled out of the ground, it records pain.



It's been demonstrated that plants are also sentient beings.



I'll ask again, which life do you value more, where is your scale, what meets your criteria and what doesn't?

I may be wrong but I think much of the basis for the above quotes stems from the work of CIA polygraph-meister, Cleve Baxter:


Grover Cleveland "Cleve" Backster, Jr. (February 27, 1924 – June 24, 2013) was an interrogation specialist for the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), best known for his experiments with plants using a polygraph instrument in the 1960s which led to his theory of "primary perception" where he claimed that plants "feel pain" and have extrasensory perception (ESP).....

This research has been used as a foundation for nullifying and neutralising the vegan/vegetarian discussion on countless occasions so I wanted to highlight the remainder of the above paragraph:


.....which was widely reported in the media but was rejected by the scientific community.

His Wiki' page elaborates on the above statement:


Reactions by the scientific community[edit]
Controlled experiments that have attempted to replicate Backster's findings have failed.[12][13][14] and the theory was not accepted since it did not follow the scientific method.[9][15] At the 141st annual meeting of American Association for the Advancement of Science, the panel of biologists found the claim unsupportable. The results seemed to be spontaneous; repeatability is still a problem, for him and the people who tried to perform his experiment. His lack of control experiments were criticized and explanations like, the polygraphs were responding to static electricity build-up and humidity changes were put forward. The reliability of the polygraph test itself has been questioned.[9] Plants have cellulose cell walls but do not possess sensory organs, which rules out the possibility of plants having ESP or consciousness.[2]

Biologist Arthur Galston told St. Petersburg Times, "We know plants don't have nervous systems. But they do have little electrical currents flowing through them and are subject to outside manipulation." He further said that plants can show altered electrical responses to light, chemical agents and disease but he "draws the line" to the claim of them "responding to human thoughts and events, including life elimination."[15][16] Scientists at the Cornell University and the Science Unlimited Research Foundation, San Antonio, Texas, could not find results that supported Backster's findings in the experiment, where the death of brine shrimp caused electrical voltage changes in the leaves of a plant in another room. Backster explained that they did not follow the exact laboratory techniques which he had used to perform the original experiments and he has not attempted to repeat them himself.[15]

Popular culture and influence[edit]
Backster's work became popular and drew public attention,[5] and his findings were similar to the beliefs of Hindus, Buddhists and New Age followers. Some parapsychologists criticized his work, suggesting the results were due to "his own telekinetic abilities".[9] His theory is in books like Peter Tompkins and Christopher Bird's The Secret Life of Plants and Robert Stone's The Secret Life of Your Cells.[5] He was a guest on June 27, 2007 on the evening radio show, "Coast To Coast AM", during which he discussed with host George Noory and with callers to the program his experiments with primary perception and findings of an interconnection between all living cells.[citation needed] He had been a guest several times before on Art Bell's Coast to Coast, as well as on Jeff Rense's radio shows, and has presented papers at many international conferences and meetings as well as those in the US.[citation needed]

Marcel Vogel claimed to be able to duplicate this effect "using plants as transducers for bio-energetic fields from the human mind". Backster's work caught the attention of the Church of Scientology founder, Ron Hubbard. Hubbard officially used the polygraph as an "E-meter" and he too, published plant communication experiments on tomato plants.[11]

Backster's "Primary Perception" theory was a subject of the Discovery Channel television show MythBusters.[17] After all human and environmental stimuli that could alter the results were removed, they reproduced Backster's experiments with the dracaena plant, yoghurt, saliva and eggs. After getting negative results, they performed a final experiment using an EEG instrument, which is more sensitive than a polygraph, connected it to a plant to check whether it would "see" eggs being catapulted randomly into boiling water. The instrument registered no change in the plant and the myth was considered as busted in that episode.

Of course I'm more than open to the notion of scientific dogma and skepticism impeding valid research (not to mention Wikipedia) but given that Baxter's results were independently tested and deemed unrepeatable, dogma shouldn't necessarily be an issue in this case.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cleve_Backster

[Akasha]

Spy Drones Expose Smithfield Foods Factory Farms


SINCE 2012, the director of "Speciesism: The Movie" has been secretly using spy drones to investigate and expose the environmental devastation caused by factory farms. In this video, the drones capture shocking aerial footage of the massive facilities that supply pigs for Smithfield Foods.

The video claims there are over 2000 such operations in North Carolina alone!

Brief clip below. Click the link (unfortunately it wouldn't embed for some strange reason).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ayGJ1YSfDXs#t=260

This is wrong on so many levels.

More info' and a link to watch the full documentary (not free though - $2.99): http://factoryfarmdrones.com/

[Akasha]

More info' and a link to watch the full documentary (not free though - $2.99): http://factoryfarmdrones.com/

The film Speciesism (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2359814/) can be accessed via torrent. Highly recommended (8.4 IMDb rating)!

[DeDukshyn]

More info' and a link to watch the full documentary (not free though - $2.99): http://factoryfarmdrones.com/

The film Speciesism (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2359814/) can be accessed via torrent. Highly recommended (8.4 IMDb rating)!

Looks good, thanks Akasha!

[Akasha]

Through a combination of hand-held and hidden camera footage, Lucent explores the darker side of Australia's pig farming industry, highlighting the day-to-day cruelty accepted by the industry as standard practice.
Lucent is the result of a successful crowdfunding campaign initiated in late 2013. Narrated by Lindsay McDougall (The Doctor from Triple J), the film contains footage from over 50 farms and slaughterhouses across Australia - much of this footage has never been seen before.
Rated MA15+

Lucent (2014) - Full documentary (http://vimeo.com/109361353)

[Pam]

I was thinking this morning about entitlement. Believing that something is owed us. I looked up the definition and was surprised to see that the term came from government benefits, such as social security. You put money into this account and when you retire you are entitled to monthly checks. The definition went on to explain that entitlements now include benefits you receive that you may not have contributed to, such as food stamps.

It seems to me that humans have a huge problem with entitlement. We feel that because we are on this planet we are entitled to do whatever we want. We are like bad, bad house guests that treat the host and other household members with the greatest disrespect for their hospitality. We eat their food, trash out the premises, rape and torture the other member of the household and feel we can walk away with a healthy swagger and no appreciation.

There used to be a balance on this planet that is gone. With this sense of entitlement, and the ability to compartmentalize we continue the destruction. The only hope I see is that we have to expand our conscious understanding of our place here. We have to really want the balance to return.We have to come to understand that this balance is a important as the air we breath. We have to forfeit the entitlement. How many of us would give up our creature comforts to allow this to happen? I have to honestly ask myself that question? Maybe it is not necessary to give up anything. Maybe we change our priorities.

How can we treat the other creatures of this planet with so little respect? We can love our "pets" and would do anything for them and at the same time we could care less what happens to other animals. One thing I know in my heart is that we will never evolve until we can look at what we have done squarely in the face and see that it is wrong.

Akasha, I applaud your tireless efforts to bring information and insight to those that dare look. I thank those that have documented the atrocities that are occurring at this moment on this planet. I can't help but believe that when one ingests the animal products that come from these factory torture chambers they are consuming an energy signature that is anything but healthy and conducive to great mental, physical or spiritual health.

It's time for me to step down off my soap box. I thank you for providing a place for this most important of topics, Akasha.

[TargeT]

Through a combination of hand-held and hidden camera footage, Lucent explores the darker side of Australia's pig farming industry, highlighting the day-to-day cruelty accepted by the industry as standard practice.
Lucent is the result of a successful crowdfunding campaign initiated in late 2013. Narrated by Lindsay McDougall (The Doctor from Triple J), the film contains footage from over 50 farms and slaughterhouses across Australia - much of this footage has never been seen before.
Rated MA15+

Lucent (2014) - Full documentary (http://vimeo.com/109361353)

factory animal slaughter is just disgraceful, I was present for the slaughter of the last pig I roasted & it was quickly done and much less traumatic all around when compared to the way things are done "en mass".


Humans loose sight of individuals once numbers reach a certain level. You can see this in the face of large city DMV workers with humans and farm laborers with animals at these factory farms.


we do not HAVE to "loose sight" but we are predisposed to it and the amount of introspection needed to overcome those predispositions is uncommonly practiced in the population at large.


we are emotional children for the most part & have been encouraged to be this way due to our predictable & easily guided/directed nature in this state.

[Akasha]

factory animal slaughter is just disgraceful, I was present for the slaughter of the last pig I roasted & it was quickly done and much less traumatic all around when compared to the way things are done "en mass".


Humans loose sight of individuals once numbers reach a certain level. You can see this in the face of large city DMV workers with humans and farm laborers with animals at these factory farms.


we do not HAVE to "loose sight" but we are predisposed to it and the amount of introspection needed to overcome those predispositions is uncommonly practiced in the population at large.

I appreciate the input Target, but it's difficult for me to move beyond your indifference towards the murder of the pig in question. I suppose it is "less" bad than if it had endured a factory style slaughter but it was a creature with as much, if not more, intelligence than your dogs. Still, I guess in Asia some dogs will be fortunate enough to be humanely killed and roasted like your pig in question. I find each scenario as horrific as the other.


we do not HAVE to "loose sight" but we are predisposed to it and the amount of introspection needed to overcome those predispositions is uncommonly practiced in the population at large.

we are emotional children for the most part & have been encouraged to be this way due to our predictable & easily guided/directed nature in this state.

Being subject to the meat trick (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?62855-Does-Our-Treatment-of-Animals-Affect-How-We-Treat-Each-Other&p=873929&viewfull=1#post873929) at an early age is one of the ways we are conditioned to "loose sight".

[donk]

As I started allowing the excitement of my new baby pooch tomorrow, I was overcome with sadness, yearning for one more hug of my big baby Summit…

…then to blow one more bonghit to my big Thumper bunny in my lap

…and wish I could do the dishes one more time with my Poe and Heddy girls (fancy rats) on my shoulder, nibbing on my (long-gone) hair

…after coming home to the excited chirps of my old cavies.

Living with animal hoarder for years, a woman in search of the unconditional love of a being molded to her liking, I wonder how my OWNERSHIP of these beings with no awareness of that insane concept effected them…….how it effected me. Regrets for every thoughtless imposition of my will on them.

7d4cDMiUarA

I wonder if I…and those I relate to and love, are the pets of consciousnesses with more understanding than us, as opposed to those miserable folk who live in fear of freedom and need for security—are they instead OWNED by consciousnesses that chose to farm them….and are we all different from those that seem to love to hurt others or have a need for control…are those souls owned by a consciousnesses that see us as little ants to just be stepped on, flies they wouldn’t think twice to go out of their way to swat for fun?

There’s whole other dimensions to consider than that of just FOOD…predator/prey relationships seem really benign in nature…it doesn’t seem like the eaten take it personally, does not seem like the fed take pleasure in the destruction of the life it is taking…but the concept of ownership….now there is where the emotional attachments come in…

H833o5lnB2E

[TargeT]

I appreciate the input Target, but it's difficult for me to move beyond your indifference towards the murder of the pig in question. I suppose it is "less" bad than if it had endured a factory style slaughter but it was a creature with as much, if not more, intelligence than your dogs. Still, I guess in Asia some dogs will be fortunate enough to be humanely killed and roasted like your pig in question. I find each scenario as horrific as the other.


well, I suppose that depends on your current "reality perception" and any boundaries you have placed in that perception.

Are we this body? what is this 3d playground we live in? is this all real, is it a simulation/illusion?

Since nothing can ever be destroyed, only changed (a law of physics we are fairly certain of) what "IS" death?

what is more important, intent or action ?

are you purely physical, or something else?

I'll have to answer those questions very solidly before I start judging one life form consuming another and the various nuances of that concept (animal to plant, animal to animal, earth to animal(?), energetic consumption(?)).

[Violet]

I don't remember what came first, my liking animals or disliking meat. There is a connection there.

I have the impression that in countries where animals are better off, in general there seems to also be a better application of human rights as well.

[spiritwind]

All I can say is I decided to meet my husband in the middle. He consumed the typical American diet when I met him, coffee and donut for breakfast (he still does that if he can! Or actually a rice Krispy treat lately), and things like Campbell's microwaveable soups. If he went out it was always a steak.

I had been vegetarian off and on much of my adult life. I now eat some chicken, turkey and fish, very sparingly, and my husband learned to eat fakin bacon, boca burgers, and zucchini rice casserole, among other things. Now he finds that eating a lot of meat doesn't even have nearly as much appeal. A few health issues have helped sway him my way.

I raise goats and wouldn't think of eating them, and my awareness of the consciousness of everything has increased, not just animals. I bless and thank each bite as I eat. But I would not want to force my ways on anyone. That's my two cents on the topic. I do think the complete removal of raising animals for meat from individual farms to corporations whose sole purpose is increasing profit margins put things in a whole new ball park. If people really saw what was going on, I'm sure there would be more of an outcry. Some serious cognitive dissonance going on there.

[Desire]

Thank you for some great quotes. It is always hard for people to come to terms with the realisation that we kill and eat our own brothers and sisters for no real reason other than to feast......as the new blood of my tribe ( ngai tahu) I am constantly reminded of the responsibility to the honouring of the animals who sacrifice there flesh and energy to enable me to be who I AM.... We once only took the lives of few for the requirements of survival...and even then we placed great honour to those animals for there service to us for providing us with there life force.
It goes along way to pay respect every time a side of beef or a chickens carcass or a fish is brought to your plate in your need to eat and survive......REMEMBER these animals give themselves knowingly for our benefit....give respect to each and every animal you place in your mouth...

Hi etheric underground,

Although you said a lot of good things, I do not believe animals "knowingly" give themselves for our benefit.But I can see how that can make someone feel better.Just thinkin!

[Guish]

I'm going to just share something. I've been eating meat occasionally since a long time ago. As I have evolved spiritually, the meat consumption has decreased on its own. I was offered chicken two weeks ago. As I tried to eat it, I got a flash of animals being killed and I felt extremely depressed. I'm hardly an emotional person. I've been off meat since and I do feel lighter and more serene.

[Pam]

As I started allowing the excitement of my new baby pooch tomorrow, I was overcome with sadness, yearning for one more hug of my big baby Summit…

…then to blow one more bonghit to my big Thumper bunny in my lap

…and wish I could do the dishes one more time with my Poe and Heddy girls (fancy rats) on my shoulder, nibbing on my (long-gone) hair

…after coming home to the excited chirps of my old cavies.

Living with animal hoarder for years, a woman in search of the unconditional love of a being molded to her liking, I wonder how my OWNERSHIP of these beings with no awareness of that insane concept effected them…….how it effected me. Regrets for every thoughtless imposition of my will on them.

7d4cDMiUarA

I wonder if I…and those I relate to and love, are the pets of consciousnesses with more understanding than us, as opposed to those miserable folk who live in fear of freedom and need for security—are they instead OWNED by consciousnesses that chose to farm them….and are we all different from those that seem to love to hurt others or have a need for control…are those souls owned by a consciousnesses that see us as little ants to just be stepped on, flies they wouldn’t think twice to go out of their way to swat for fun?

There’s whole other dimensions to consider than that of just FOOD…predator/prey relationships seem really benign in nature…it doesn’t seem like the eaten take it personally, does not seem like the fed take pleasure in the destruction of the life it is taking…but the concept of ownership….now there is where the emotional attachments come in…

H833o5lnB2E


Donk, I just love this post. You have really given me a lot to think about. The following excerpt in particular:

"I wonder if I…and those I relate to and love, are the pets of consciousnesses with more understanding than us, as opposed to those miserable folk who live in fear of freedom and need for security—are they instead OWNED by consciousnesses that chose to farm them….and are we all different from those that seem to love to hurt others or have a need for control…are those souls owned by a consciousnesses that see us as little ants to just be stepped on, flies they wouldn’t think twice to go out of their way to swat for fun?"

]I really think you are on to something here. I have always felt that I am limiting my own consciousness by dealing with the issue of the way we treat other creatures in such an emotional way. Intuitively, I know that I am not able to see the bigger picture and I feel like you have just given me an intriguing peek into the bigger picture.. You have a most interesting mind.[/COLOR]

[Pam]

I'm going to just share something. I've been eating meat occasionally since a long time ago. As I have evolved spiritually, the meat consumption has decreased on its own. I was offered chicken two weeks ago. As I tried to eat it, I got a flash of animals being killed and I felt extremely depressed. I'm hardly an emotional person. I've been off meat since and I do feel lighter and more serene.

The same thing happened with my son. He did not make a definitive decision to quit eating meat. He just began to observe that the meat he was eating, began eating at him, so to speak.The pleasure of eating meat was gone. It was a sort of natural evolution. I think this sort of thing shows that you are self aware. On the other hand, I made a sort of intellectual decision to stop eating meat.I did not have much self awareness at the time. I think I began to get a little self awareness after I made the commitment, it was empowering.

[Wind]

Something to think about.

tQIMJ648qgg

[Akasha]

I appreciate the input Target, but it's difficult for me to move beyond your indifference towards the murder of the pig in question. I suppose it is "less" bad than if it had endured a factory style slaughter but it was a creature with as much, if not more, intelligence than your dogs. Still, I guess in Asia some dogs will be fortunate enough to be humanely killed and roasted like your pig in question. I find each scenario as horrific as the other.


well, I suppose that depends on your current "reality perception" and any boundaries you have placed in that perception.

Are we this body? what is this 3d playground we live in? is this all real, is it a simulation/illusion?

Since nothing can ever be destroyed, only changed (a law of physics we are fairly certain of) what "IS" death?

what is more important, intent or action ?

are you purely physical, or something else?

I'll have to answer those questions very solidly before I start judging one life form consuming another and the various nuances of that concept (animal to plant, animal to animal, earth to animal(?), energetic consumption(?)).

Human consciousness, perhaps because of it's profound potential for both good and bad, appears to come packaged with a conscience (maybe with the exception of certain psychopathic types). Attempted bamboozling of said conscience with metaphysical hyperbole for the sake of the palate may still work for you but I just can't get away with it anymore.

[Desire]

Hi Akasha

Does our treatment of animals affect how we treat each other. A big YES. Women seem for the most part(don't go crazy good men) to understand this better because IMO we have the babies and appreciate all life not just our own babies.Thanks for your efforts ,don't ever waver, you are right Love the creatures large and small.

[Akasha]

Something to think about.

tQIMJ648qgg


.....out of the mouths of babes and sucklings.....

Just beautiful. Definitely not falling for the meat trick (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?62855-Does-Our-Treatment-of-Animals-Affect-How-We-Treat-Each-Other&p=873929&viewfull=1#post873929) and fortunate to have a parent who recognises the divine intent and then respects it.

[Pam]

Something to think about.

tQIMJ648qgg


.....out of the mouths of babes and sucklings.....

Just beautiful. Definitely not falling for the meat trick (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?62855-Does-Our-Treatment-of-Animals-Affect-How-We-Treat-Each-Other&p=873929&viewfull=1#post873929) and fortunate to have a parent who recognises the divine intent and then respects it.


Oh my dear, how beautiful and pure is that child. How do we as the human race go from the purity of this lovely child to the mechanizations of greed and indifference on the other end of the spectrum, ie ,factory farms and the like? What a contrast. It makes me wonder, will this beautiful soul be able to maintain some degree of purity, inquisitiveness and curiosity or will he too fall victim to our times?

[Guish]

Something interesting for you to consider.



Is egg vegetarian?

Questioner: Some people even argue that there are two types of eggs. Eggs with life and eggs without life, so can we eat the latter?

Dadashri: Yes, they argue that there are eggs, which are lifeless, so technically it is non-violent to consume them. I tell them that it is impossible to eat anything that is non-living. You cannot eat anything that is lifeless. If eggs did not contain life, they would be considered inanimate and therefore inedible. Only living things can be eaten as long as they are not spoilt. Even vegetables will rot and become inedible a few days after being freshly picked. One can only eat living things. There is no truth in the statement that an egg has no life in it. It is a wonder that people have created such a concept. Anything that is non-living cannot be eaten.

Questioner: But these 'vegetarian eggs' do not develop into a chick.

Dadashri: That is a different matter, but there is indeed life in them.

People are being misinformed. This issue has become a difficult one for Jain children to accept. So many of them argue with me about this and I simply tell them that they should give this more thought. There is no problem if there is no life in it, but you cannot eat anything that is lifeless. If you are eating an egg with the idea that it does not contain life, then you should also stop eating grains and only eat food that does not contain any life. Food that does not contain life may satisfy hunger but it does not have any nutritional value and it will not nourish and sustain the body. The children accepted this and agreed to stop eating eggs altogether. People will listen if one takes the time to explain things to them; otherwise there is so much misinformation out there to lead a person's intellect astray.

All foods contain life, but the Lord tells humans to consume only certain foods. He has drawn limits about which foods are allowed and which are forbidden. You must not harm or eat things that flee from you for their life.
- See more at: http://www.dadabhagwan.org/scientific-solutions/spiritual-science/non-violence-and-spiritual-awareness/is-egg-vegetarian/#sthash.K729ejZM.dpuf

[Robin]

Something interesting for you to consider.



Is egg vegetarian?


Hey Guish,

I can't answer for Akasha, but I think that vegans generally agree that eating eggs from a hen is just as unethical as eating the hen herself. Though hen eggs are the equivalent to a woman's period, it is the very concept of keeping and containing animals against their will that bothers vegans. Even if somebody has free-range chickens and they are given love and are well taken care of, it is still slavery. Even in the best of conditions, one is still preventing this sentient being from being able to eat whenever and whatever it wants, to travel wherever it wants, and to choose whether or not she wants her eggs to be eaten when she has been conditioned to be defenseless through our genetic tinkering. This is the definition of slavery, and is speciesism.

Personally, I feel that any form of slavery is unethical and immoral. If we allow slavery to happen on a smaller level, I feel that this way of thinking moves to other parts of our societies whether we are conscious of it or not. Like...the belief in the legitimacy and morality of authority, which is a soft word for slavery.

[Abhaya]

I think that lifeless eggs is in fact an incorrect term. The unfertalized egg contains concentrated life of the chicken that hatched it. Intended to support the life of a chick should it be fertilized. So while it may not bring forth new life if it is unfertalized it does contain some "life" borrowed from the hen. So I would argue that there is some nutritional value, but as to whether or not we should eat them that is up for debate.

[Guish]

Something interesting for you to consider.



Is egg vegetarian?


Hey Guish,

I can't answer for Akasha, but I think that vegans generally agree that eating eggs from a hen is just as unethical as eating the hen herself. Though hen eggs are the equivalent to a woman's period, it is the very concept of keeping and containing animals against their will that bothers vegans. Even if somebody has free-range chickens and they are given love and are well taken care of, it is still slavery. Even in the best of conditions, one is still preventing this sentient being from being able to eat whenever and whatever it wants, to travel wherever it wants, and to choose whether or not she wants her eggs to be eaten when she has been conditioned to be defenseless through our genetic tinkering. This is the definition of slavery, and is speciesism.

Personally, I feel that any form of slavery is unethical and immoral. If we allow slavery to happen on a smaller level, I feel that this way of thinking moves to other parts of our societies whether we are conscious of it or not. Like...the belief in the legitimacy and morality of authority, which is a soft word for slavery.

I agree with you.
People need to be aware that any action that can cause or causes suffering is not the right one. We don't need any religion to know that. However, I've been feeling very miserable recently. I've been feeling bad even while eating veggies. I felt really broken today when I saw people cutting a tree. It's probably just a phase.

[Robin]

I agree with you.
People need to be aware that any action that can cause or causes suffering is not the right one. We don't need any religion to know that. However, I've been feeling very miserable recently. I've been feeling bad even while eating veggies. I felt really broken today when I saw people cutting a tree. It's probably just a phase.

That's compassion and empathy, my friend. :)

If I were able, I would choose not to eat anything and be a breatharian. But I don't think humanity is advanced enough to be able to live off of the air alone yet. For now, I'm content eating only plants, because I need to eat something! Plants do not have sentience and their composition is chemical-based instead of neural-based. This doesn't mean I think of plants being inferior to any other group of organism--far from it! Plants heal, cleanse the air, hold Mother Earth's soil together to prevent it from blowing away, and connect other species together through a vast system of interconnected highways beneath the soil. Plants do not run away because their spiritual essence is connected with the fabric of the whole organism of Mother Earth, rather than the individuation of animals.

[Guish]

I agree with you.
People need to be aware that any action that can cause or causes suffering is not the right one. We don't need any religion to know that. However, I've been feeling very miserable recently. I've been feeling bad even while eating veggies. I felt really broken today when I saw people cutting a tree. It's probably just a phase.

That's compassion and empathy, my friend. :)

If I were able, I would choose not to eat anything and be a breatharian. But I don't think humanity is advanced enough to be able to live off of the air alone yet. For now, I'm content eating only plants, because I need to eat something! Plants do not have sentience and their composition is chemical-based instead of neural-based. This doesn't mean I think of plants being inferior to any other group of organism--far from it! Plants heal, cleanse the air, hold Mother Earth's soil together to prevent it from blowing away, and connect other species together through a vast system of interconnected highways beneath the soil. Plants do not run away because their spiritual essence is connected with the fabric of the whole organism of Mother Earth, rather than the individuation of animals.


You have a beautiful soul my Friend. Nice meeting you.

[Pam]

Something interesting for you to consider.



Is egg vegetarian?


Hey Guish,

I can't answer for Akasha, but I think that vegans generally agree that eating eggs from a hen is just as unethical as eating the hen herself. Though hen eggs are the equivalent to a woman's period, it is the very concept of keeping and containing animals against their will that bothers vegans. Even if somebody has free-range chickens and they are given love and are well taken care of, it is still slavery. Even in the best of conditions, one is still preventing this sentient being from being able to eat whenever and whatever it wants, to travel wherever it wants, and to choose whether or not she wants her eggs to be eaten when she has been conditioned to be defenseless through our genetic tinkering. This is the definition of slavery, and is speciesism.

Personally, I feel that any form of slavery is unethical and immoral. If we allow slavery to happen on a smaller level, I feel that this way of thinking moves to other parts of our societies whether we are conscious of it or not. Like...the belief in the legitimacy and morality of authority, which is a soft word for slavery.

I agree with you.
People need to be aware that any action that can cause or causes suffering is not the right one. We don't need any religion to know that. However, I've been feeling very miserable recently. I've been feeling bad even while eating veggies. I felt really broken today when I saw people cutting a tree. It's probably just a phase.


Guish, I know how you feel. I wonder about the dynamics of the planet that I live on. That nothing lives without taking the life of another. Sometime's I feel it is unbearable, at other times I feel like I am transferring my angst about suffering onto all creatures and all living things. The truth is I don't know what vegetation truly experiences when it's life force is taken. I suspect that vegetation as a more direct connection to source and that may make this concept of suffering a non issue. I think the thing that I ultimately find very hard to deal with is the disrespect we, as the human race show to all living things. There is no excuse or rationalization that I can come up with for that. I look in my compost pile sometimes and am blown away at the ability of onions to regenerate from the smallest remaining piece and I admire it so much. Is it the onion or the life force that I am admiring? Anyway, this is some crazy rambling I am doing here..... The one comfort I have is that at some point I will donate my life force back to the planet and all things will be made equal.. we really are connected on so many levels.

[Robin]

Guish, I know how you feel. I wonder about the dynamics of the planet that I live on. That nothing lives without taking the life of another. Sometime's I feel it is unbearable, at other times I feel like I am transferring my angst about suffering onto all creatures and all living things. The truth is I don't know what vegetation truly experiences when it's life force is taken. I suspect that vegetation as a more direct connection to source and that may make this concept of suffering a non issue. I think the thing that I ultimately find very hard to deal with is the disrespect we, as the human race show to all living things. There is no excuse or rationalization that I can come up with for that. I look in my compost pile sometimes and am blown away at the ability of onions to regenerate from the smallest remaining piece and I admire it so much. Is it the onion or the life force that I am admiring? Anyway, this is some crazy rambling I am doing here..... The one comfort I have is that at some point I will donate my life force back to planet and all things will be made equal.. we really are connected on so many levels.

Indeed. I think it is extremely arrogant for humans to place their bodies in an enclosed casket and to be buried with a tombstone above the body. For one, it is a foolish attempt at denying Mother Earth her reclamation of molecules from a deceased human body so the collective ecosystem could benefit from the circle of life. Thankfully, bacteria at least make their way into the casket to break apart the "holy" body of dead humans. In addition to this, we have the audacity to pile gravestone upon gravestone in graveyards which end up being a never-ending line of ecosystem destruction. Just like with continuing to build houses over once pristine areas with the exponential increase in the population, do we seriously think that we have an infinite amount of space for our tombstone collection?

When I die, I'm going to ask of my body to be buried bare in the ground with no casket and no gravestone. Instead, I'm going to have a tree planted above my body, so the tree can suck up the nutrients that my body produces and can flourish. It would also be a more significant grave marker that a stone, because the tree is living and breathing and has my essence running through its veins! I envision a future where this will be commonplace, and it will be a great gift for Mother Earth to pay her back for all the damage we have done as a species. Instead of acres of stones scarring the landscape, there will be new forests that spring up that contain the essences of humanity's will to repair their transgressions upon Mother Earth.

[Pam]

Guish, I know how you feel. I wonder about the dynamics of the planet that I live on. That nothing lives without taking the life of another. Sometime's I feel it is unbearable, at other times I feel like I am transferring my angst about suffering onto all creatures and all living things. The truth is I don't know what vegetation truly experiences when it's life force is taken. I suspect that vegetation as a more direct connection to source and that may make this concept of suffering a non issue. I think the thing that I ultimately find very hard to deal with is the disrespect we, as the human race show to all living things. There is no excuse or rationalization that I can come up with for that. I look in my compost pile sometimes and am blown away at the ability of onions to regenerate from the smallest remaining piece and I admire it so much. Is it the onion or the life force that I am admiring? Anyway, this is some crazy rambling I am doing here..... The one comfort I have is that at some point I will donate my life force back to planet and all things will be made equal.. we really are connected on so many levels.

Indeed. I think it is extremely arrogant for humans to place their bodies in an enclosed casket and to be buried with a tombstone above the body. For one, it is a foolish attempt at denying Mother Earth her reclamation of molecules from a deceased human body so the collective ecosystem could benefit from the circle of life. Thankfully, bacteria at least make their way into the casket to break apart the "holy" body of dead humans. In addition to this, we have the audacity to pile gravestone upon gravestone in graveyards which end up being a never-ending line of ecosystem destruction. Just like with continuing to build houses over once pristine areas with the exponential increase in the population, do we seriously think that we have an infinite amount of space for our tombstone collection?

When I die, I'm going to ask of my body to be buried bare in the ground with no casket and no gravestone. Instead, I'm going to have a tree planted above my body, so the tree can suck up the nutrients that my body produces and can flourish. It would also be a more significant grave marker that a stone, because the tree is living and breathing and has my essence running through its veins! I envision a future where this will be commonplace, and it will be a great gift for Mother Earth to pay her back for all the damage we have done as a species. Instead of acres of stones scarring the landscape, there will be new forests that spring up that contain the essences of humanity's will to repair their transgressions upon Mother Earth.


Robin, I love your vision of returning to the earth. Do you know that in many states, if not all, your plan to go directly in the ground is against the law. Probably lobbied into law by morticians. Once again the almighty dollar wins over balance and the integrity of the earth.

I love the idea of nourishing a tree, maybe a majestic oak or a weeping willow. It would be wonderful to be the compost that fertilizes the floor of the forest. These thoughts are very comforting to me

I hope this isn't too off topic, but it fits in indirectly because the way we treat our dear earth is most likely the way we treat animals. Everything is connected in the end.

With much love,
Pam

[Desire]

'ARE EGGS VEGETARIAN?"

Hi Everyone'
There are two kinds of eggs. If the egg is never fertilized it can never evolve into a
bird. This is what an ovo-lacto vegetarian will eat.
In some countries they will fertilize the eggs and then when a chick developes will boil the fertilized egg and eat it
Personally I find that cruel..
Love to all

[Akasha]

.....We wonder why humans are such a messed up species - we can't get along with each other, we have wars, we have discrimination, we have sexism, heterosexism, anti-semitism. It's because we don't teach that speciesism is evil and it's the root of all hatred. All the branches of hatred - racism and sexism - stem from speciesism.....

Gary Yourofsky (from the brief interview below)

7bD_MSOcZgM

[Akasha]

Something interesting for you to consider.



Is egg vegetarian?

Questioner: Some people even argue that there are two types of eggs. Eggs with life and eggs without life, so can we eat the latter?

Dadashri: Yes, they argue that there are eggs, which are lifeless, so technically it is non-violent to consume them. I tell them that it is impossible to eat anything that is non-living. You cannot eat anything that is lifeless. If eggs did not contain life, they would be considered inanimate and therefore inedible. Only living things can be eaten as long as they are not spoilt. Even vegetables will rot and become inedible a few days after being freshly picked. One can only eat living things. There is no truth in the statement that an egg has no life in it. It is a wonder that people have created such a concept. Anything that is non-living cannot be eaten.

Questioner: But these 'vegetarian eggs' do not develop into a chick.

Dadashri: That is a different matter, but there is indeed life in them.

People are being misinformed. This issue has become a difficult one for Jain children to accept. So many of them argue with me about this and I simply tell them that they should give this more thought. There is no problem if there is no life in it, but you cannot eat anything that is lifeless. If you are eating an egg with the idea that it does not contain life, then you should also stop eating grains and only eat food that does not contain any life. Food that does not contain life may satisfy hunger but it does not have any nutritional value and it will not nourish and sustain the body. The children accepted this and agreed to stop eating eggs altogether. People will listen if one takes the time to explain things to them; otherwise there is so much misinformation out there to lead a person's intellect astray.

All foods contain life, but the Lord tells humans to consume only certain foods. He has drawn limits about which foods are allowed and which are forbidden. You must not harm or eat things that flee from you for their life.
- See more at: http://www.dadabhagwan.org/scientific-solutions/spiritual-science/non-violence-and-spiritual-awareness/is-egg-vegetarian/#sthash.K729ejZM.dpuf

Hi Guish and thanks for the input. On visiting the site you quoted, I decided to see what the Jain (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jainism) concensus was on milk and discovered the following from the same site:


Is milk vegetarian or nonvegetarian?
Questioner: Just as one should not eat the 'vegetarian' egg, one should not drink the milk of a cow.

Dadashri: You cannot eat eggs but you can drink cows' milk, eat yogurt and some can even eat butter made from that milk. There are no restrictions.

The Lord had forbidden some people to eat butter, but that was for specific people and for a different reason. You can make puddings and sweets from that milk. Even if some scriptures forbid this, I will tell you that those scriptures are wrong and that there are no restrictions. Go ahead and enjoy them but take care not to overindulge.

Questioner: But nature had intended the milk for the calves and not for us.

Dadashri: That is completely false. Only the calves of the wild cows and buffaloes drink all their mother's milk. People however, feed and nurture cows so that both the calves and the humans can benefit from the cows' milk. This has been the practice from time immemorial. If you feed a cow well, it can produce up to fifteen liters of milk a day. If you feed it well it will produce more than the normal amount of milk so you would not be depriving the calf of its share and letting it go hungry.

- See more at: http://www.dadabhagwan.org/scientific-solutions/spiritual-science/non-violence-and-spiritual-awareness/is-milk-vegetarian/#sthash.rwzl76R6.dpuf

Law professor, animal rights activist and vegan, Gary Francione was invited as one of the keynote speakers at Jaina 2011 (and 2009). In the following speech, he clearly explains how Jain ahimsa, as highlighted in the above quote, should really go further - well......go vegan really if it is not to contradict itself:

OvqTBCIz--w

nx8kKHvnf4Q

5564t_y8tlo

Edit: I just realised that the quoted site above isn't specifially Jain. I was distracted by the Jain mention in Guish's egg quote. However, Gary's lecture still has bearing since the concept of ahimsa is by no means exclusive to Jainism.

[Guish]

Hi Akasha,

Thank you for the videos. Drinking of milk wasn't a bad thing a long time ago. My ancestors had cows which were raised by them and cows are considered as mothers. You will be aware that cows are worshipped by Hindus. Hence, a mother will not mind feeding it's children by providing milk. However, your point of view is noted. Mass production of milk in the industry and killing of cows when the latter can't produce milk is horrible.

Another link, mainstream but worth reading.

http://www.vegansociety.com/try-vegan/why-go-vegan

[Akasha]

Hi Akasha,

Thank you for the videos. Drinking of milk wasn't a bad thing a long time ago. My ancestors had cows which were raised by them and cows are considered as mothers. You will be aware that cows are worshipped by Hindus. Hence, a mother will not mind feeding it's children by providing milk. However, your point of view is noted. Mass production of milk in the industry and killing of cows when the latter can't produce milk is horrible.


Of course a mother will not mind feeding its children by providing milk. The thing is....(drum roll).....we are not the children of cows.

Domestication of cattle has changed the playing field so much, pacifying these animals to the point that we wrongly assume they have always been content to include us in the outpouring of their lactic bounty, but before the advent of domestication, procuring milk from a wild auroch (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aurochs#subspecies) or european bison (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_bison) with calf would have presented great challenges and not inconsiderable fear to those pioneering humans attempting such feats.

We should not be in any doubt that those initial acts in the history of dairy faming were acts of violation, plain and simple, and 5000 or so years later nothing has changed except the technology. Violating somebody remains an act of violence regardless of how many millennia it is repeated for and regardless of how many seemingly perennial religions condone it.

It is no coincidence that Hinduism deifies cattle since mankind's exploitation of them has significantly contributed to it's survival for thousands of years. It doesn't make it right though. It is still violence and therefore in direct opposition to the practice of ahimsa, no matter how many images of Krishna attempt to romanticise the abuse.



http://www.narendramodi.in/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/cj-090812-inner1.jpg

[Noir]

This is a very good thread Akasha.
And it is a very important issue the one you are pointing out.
Thank you for sharing all this quotes and videos and so much important information and truth with us.
I admire your patiente to answer to every question and comment here, even though much of it was in my opinion trolling and such.
For me, it shows that you are a very compassionate, strong, honest and loving being. Stay so! :muscle:
And...You sure are an eloquent person! I'm jealous:o I was never so good with words.
Thank you for sending me the link to this post.

:star::heart:Love and light for you:heart::star:

[Akasha]

I'm not so eloquent in German, haha!

Your comment is very encouraging and greatly appreciated - Thank you very much.

On the subject of trolling, I'm not sure if the more antagonistic comments are exactly that. I would define trolling as being rude on the net because you can and I think some of the opposing comments on this, and other such threads, are not driven by a motivation to be rude simply because one can get away with it. Rather they come about because the topic represents a profound and valid threat to the justification for one's addiction - an addiction which doesn't just affect the addict.

Love and light to you too!

[Wind]

I think Tim has some good points here.

pAQ1EZdyQ3U

[Akasha]

From the end of Tim's message in the above video for the benefit of those who may not have made it that far (thanks a lot for sharing it, Wind:thumbsup:).


When 99.9% of people in the western world look at an animal get killed, they feel something bad in their stomach for that animal and it's all about living that truth; not denying it, not covering your ears, la la la, head in the sand. LIVING THAT TRUTH!............... .................If i grabbed a pigeon on the street in London, ripped it's leg off and started eating it, no-one's gonna go, "ohh but we're just animals". People would go, "that guy's f****in crazy". No-one would go, "ohh but we're animals - we're meant to do it". They'd go "that guy's psycho - there's something wrong with him" and they'd be right to do it because we're not meant to eat animals - ain't like that. We're herbivores. All the physiology's there. All the science is there - everything! But most importantly, our feeling of kindness towards animals is there.

The horror which would be experienced by the vast majority of people at the sight of someone ripping a live bird apart with their teeth and eating it there and then perfectly illustrates the cognitive dissonance at play in the minds of carniverous humans with regard to the subject of eating meat.

How such horror is mentally diverted and subdued when it is us who are, by proxy, ripping the head off the bird in question, and what the overall consequences are and how they play out within the human population is the reason I started this thread. For example, is our collective apathy towards peace when our "democratically elected" governments are about to start another unjustifiable war a manifestation of such a psychological mechanism?

Taking it one stage further, is such a mechanism kept in place through memes and media for the very reason of making it that bit easier for an out-of-control power elite to perpetuate their psychotic rampage of rape, torture and murder around the world? Hmmmm: rape, torture and murder. If three words could sum up the animal agro-business, it would be those.

As above so below as it were.

BTW I appreciate that this concept will only be falsifiable once the whole world is vegan but our viciousness with each other continues. Just pondering.....

[Michael Moewes]

Something interesting for you to consider.



Is egg vegetarian?

Questioner: Some people even argue that there are two types of eggs. Eggs with life and eggs without life, so can we eat the latter?

Dadashri: Yes, they argue that there are eggs, which are lifeless, so technically it is non-violent to consume them. I tell them that it is impossible to eat anything that is non-living. You cannot eat anything that is lifeless. If eggs did not contain life, they would be considered inanimate and therefore inedible. Only living things can be eaten as long as they are not spoilt. Even vegetables will rot and become inedible a few days after being freshly picked. One can only eat living things. There is no truth in the statement that an egg has no life in it. It is a wonder that people have created such a concept. Anything that is non-living cannot be eaten.

Questioner: But these 'vegetarian eggs' do not develop into a chick.

Dadashri: That is a different matter, but there is indeed life in them.

People are being misinformed. This issue has become a difficult one for Jain children to accept. So many of them argue with me about this and I simply tell them that they should give this more thought. There is no problem if there is no life in it, but you cannot eat anything that is lifeless. If you are eating an egg with the idea that it does not contain life, then you should also stop eating grains and only eat food that does not contain any life. Food that does not contain life may satisfy hunger but it does not have any nutritional value and it will not nourish and sustain the body. The children accepted this and agreed to stop eating eggs altogether. People will listen if one takes the time to explain things to them; otherwise there is so much misinformation out there to lead a person's intellect astray.

All foods contain life, but the Lord tells humans to consume only certain foods. He has drawn limits about which foods are allowed and which are forbidden. You must not harm or eat things that flee from you for their life.
- See more at: http://www.dadabhagwan.org/scientific-solutions/spiritual-science/non-violence-and-spiritual-awareness/is-egg-vegetarian/#sthash.K729ejZM.dpuf

Well, the point actually is not that easy. One one hand, not fecunded eggs aren't alive. On the other hand, abd that's the major reason why I don't eat eggs anymore is, that to produce eggs, henns are needed and abused and tortured, but when you breed some to produce more eggs, the cocks are being killed right away.
So the imagination, that when you eat an egg, you've probably been responsable for the death of thousands of cocks. that's a complete no go for me.
Live healthy, Live Vegan

[Akasha]

Youtuber, Vegan Activist (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCE0yGL4Bgs2QNomOrslyLtw), shares his perspective. warning: images of normal animal agriculture practices

0OXvcVb71co

[Akasha]

I cannot see how there can be any real and full recognition of Kinship as long as men continue either to cheat or to eat their fellow beings.

Henry Stephens Salt (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_Stephens_Salt)

Gandhi read Salt's book, A Plea For Vegetarianism (https://archive.org/details/pleaforvegetaria1886salt), when he was a student in London, sometime between 1888 and 1891 and was profoundly influenced by the book.


It was Mr. Salt's book, A Plea for Vegetarianism, which showed me why, apart from my adherence to a vow administered to me by my mother, it was right to be a vegetarian. He showed me why it was a moral duty incumbent on vegetarians not to live upon fellow-animals.

Ghandi (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahatma_Gandhi)

[Akasha]

Powsimian (https://www.youtube.com/user/powsimians) pretty much encapsulates the essence of the OP in the following short video (caution - occasional f-bombs):


…..someone asked, almost as a rhetorical question at work, "man, when will people stop doing this?" (in response to the Chatanooga shooting - ed) and I said,"probably when we stop killing animals"……

…..it's not just a few individuals, it's this whole system that's built on hatred, contradiction and accepting your own hypocrisy, and basically, reverting that back, you say "it can't be wrong because I do it"…..Wrong! You can't have logic like that. That's not logic, that's psychosis…..

…..people don't wanna die - they see it as something to fear, and yet they welcome it for other species, you know? They brush it off, and the other thing is, it doesn't make them hungry. Death doesn't make them hungry. Death doesn't get people lickin' their chompers you know? People don't wanna see slaughterhouse footage to get them amped up to eat - that's not how it works for humans, however, the blood, all that - that's appetite stimulation for the meat-eating animal. Humans are vegan. Humans are herbivorous and to be more specific, frugivorous - we're apes, bathing apes, baby!

tu7ocZyklIQ

[Desrknelf]

Steve Richards, an Aboriginal healer here, says the laws governing the harvest of animals prevent negative effects from killing. A ceremony is carried out asking for food and designating a specific species to be hunted. No other animals are to be killed. The hunters will find either nothing, or an animal that is ready to move on from its body. When it is killed, its spirit will not hook in to the killers energy body as it has a right to do, because it doesn't want to.

As I understand it a practice like this in some form is universal among peoples from all over the country.

What are your thoughts on this concept? Do you know of any practices from other cultures that serve the same purpose?

[Akasha]

Steve Richards, an Aboriginal healer here, says the laws governing the harvest of animals prevent negative effects from killing. A ceremony is carried out asking for food and designating a specific species to be hunted. No other animals are to be killed. The hunters will find either nothing, or an animal that is ready to move on from its body. When it is killed, its spirit will not hook in to the killers energy body as it has a right to do, because it doesn't want to.

As I understand it a practice like this in some form is universal among peoples from all over the country.

What are your thoughts on this concept? Do you know of any practices from other cultures that serve the same purpose?

I'm not sure which laws Steve Richards is referring to but the phrase, "harvest of animals" is problematic straight away. We are animals too. If it's not ok to harvest us, why would it be ok to harvest them? Sounds like self-justifying, speciesist-based juju to me.

If the animal truly wanted to "move on from its body", wouldn't it just go to their encampment and present itself to them as a willing sacrifice? The fact that they have to hunt it suggests that, despite the healer's claims to the contrary, it is not actually in a consenting state at all, rather wanting to survive.

I'm not sure how this ties in with the OP. Can you elaborate on why you decided to share it on this thread. Have you read the OP?

Cheers.

[Akasha]

I just posted an article on the dwindling bull-fighting industry within Columbia on the All Things Vegan (http://projectavalon.net/forum4/showthread.php?83021-All-Things-Vegan-&p=985075&viewfull=1#post985075) thread and I was particularly struck by a quote within the article which beautifully illustrates the essence of the OP for this thread:


.....“I think there is a new generation that is tired of [all the violence in Colombia],” Jennifer Rivera, a young Colombian professional and admitted animal lover, told me. “The society needs to change, to transform. … This isn’t just a discussion about whether an animal dies or not. It has to do with [our society] turning life into a spectacle. … If we want our country to be without violence, then we have to start with the most minimal of things, and this begins with respecting all living beings.”.....

[Akasha]

....as a society, the way we treat animals will be played out in the way we treat each other....

DzkVrsMoCaI

references: Slaughterhouses and Increased Crime Rates (http://oae.sagepub.com/content/22/2/158.abstract)

The Slaughterhouses, social Disorganization, and Violent Crime in Rural Communities (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/284029322_The_Slaughterhouse_Social_Disorganization_and_Violent_Crime_in_Rural_Communities)

[gracy41]

This is only my thoughts:

How dense or how light we are in our consciousness affects the way we see things and how much of things we do see. We have to chose (because of free will) to want to be more conscious and work at it, so somehow we have to get to that point, or we do get to that point because evolvement is ongoing--and it is an individual choice, not the choice of someone else.

Basically, unless we are truly enlightened on this planet, and there are many who have had impressive lighted awakenings, but are/were still not totally enlightened, and therefore still even more susceptible to falling or loosing a great deal of ground if they aren't vigilant. But even the enlightened can fall below enlightenment (especially on Earth). It is always a persistent endeavor to stay on the path, to achieve even more levels of endless enlightenment and other journeys.

Animals and humans will be mistreated by people who are operating out of a first chakra mode. They are in some deep darkness, and some are not completely operating there, but have energy there that they fall into at times. In most cases they are blind because they don't have the consciousness to see very far. They don't even have consciousness of what they are doing, but this seems to be the way entities progress, and they do progress, however long it takes.

I think we all start at the bottom at one point or another, or have worked our way back there via issues and karma. It is said in some esoteric Hindu scriptures that we live 678,000 lives before we get to a life that we even hear about enlightenment. We can have other lives on other planets, too. It is also said given the current situation and how we handle it, the Earth may remain a planet with just animals, and there will be no further use of this planet for growth by other beings.

With 678,000 lives most of us have had all the experiences (played different archetypes and combinations of) and none of us is guilt-free. Carl Jungs' shadow work is a reflection of that in many ways--of laying claim to all shadows to achieve wholeness because we are both dark and light--and it is the dance of both dark and light that allows us to evolve.

None of us likes to admit we've been animal abusers, but in reality, we are composite of all that exists on this earth and beyond. There go we, but for the grace of God, or the Universe, or Whatever. We engender all things. To be whole we can't just love the animal, we also have to love the abuser to be whole--to encompass the totality and move beyond even that.

Everyone and everything is on a journey like everything else in eternity, and even animals can be saints and gain spiritual progression when they, like very evolved Buddhists who light themselves on fire (they actually don't feel it and it is more like a purification) for causes. Animals can gain or loss karma, too, and progress spiritually. I also think our wholeness and consciousness allows us to transcend the illusions of being in a body and progress to other existences. So, it is a part of Isness and wholeness. It's life playing out its wholeness.

Good thought shared by you. Looking forward for weight loss tips. :)