(01-30-2018, 04:42 PM)anagogy Wrote: Whether you eat plants, or you eat animals, you are taking the lives of second density consciousness complexes (in fact, one animal can feed someone for many months, whereas with most plants, it takes many many many lives to generate the same amount of caloric fuel). Unless you are eating a strictly fruitarian diet, which is horrible for your teeth (a clue to the unnaturalness of such a diet -- when the food destroys an organisms teeth, it is not the natural diet to that species.
We've had this discussion before, anagogy. Plants don't have to die for their edible parts to be harvested. Many ARE harvested at the end of their lifecycle, but a tomato plant can live in my garden for many months and feed me every day without dying. You say that an animal "can" feed one person for many months, but this is NOT how 99.999% of humans eat. We take the choice cuts and grind the rest into dog food. So while in "theory" it might be "more ethical" to eat animals, in practice it is definitely not.
It takes 30 of those precious plant calories to convert into 1 animal flesh calorie. How again is there less death with the animal slaughter method?
(01-30-2018, 04:18 PM)Bring4th_Jade Wrote:Quote:Sorry if I'm repeating myself, I just feel like maybe there's a misunderstanding somewhere that could be clarified.
As I said, I don't even know why I posted in the first place. No minds are ever changed by these conversations. It just the same thing, recycled over and over. Everybody will just believe whatever they believed to begin with. Beliefs simply look for evidence to justify themselves.
I guess I just sustain faith that this is how we bridge gaps, is that we communicate with each other, as openly and honestly as possible. I'm open to changing my mind. I'm not open to eating animals again, but I'm totally open to being offered a different understanding of the Ra material than the one that I am admittedly biased to.