In regards to eating meat

[Patrick]

I do not agree, but we did not agree on a format for such a discussion.

I didn't realize you were suggesting a 'logic' format for discussing the official stance of the medical community. I thought you wanted to delve into logic regarding the discussion in general.

Are you saying you disagree with the medical community, who clearly states that a vegetarian, and even vegan, diet is adequate and can even reduce the risk of disease?

It's ok if you disagree with the medical community. I disagree with them on other issues. I just happen to agree on this one.

But I think it's important to be clear that you are disagreeing with the medical community, not just me.

A 'logic' format would have been useful for our discussion in general, but yes I will not discuss the scientific aspect without such a format.

I will instead simplify my opinion on this to the extreme.

I am saying that the scientific community does not agree with itself on that subject. In fact it does not agree with itself on any subject as far as I am aware of. So the consensus you appeal to does not exist.

We would have to actually debate 'logically' the whole thing ourselves here if you wanted to know with what I agree and with what I do not. For this, we would have to enunciate our premises and agree to them before even making arguments.

I don't know for you, but I'm not really interested in this. I've done it before and nothing good ever resulted.

So I will simply not discuss this subject.

That's your choice! I just wanted to point out just who or what it is you are disagreeing with.

I hope I was able to clear that up.

How about the responsibility/honor that I have towards my other selves living with me and around me? They eat meat, if I was to stop, this would affect them negatively and hurt them (I've already discussed this with them in the past). These are the catalysts that I am provided with and that I use.

We all have families. I cannot fathom how your personal choice to quit eating meat could possibly hurt another person.

It might cause a bit of inconvenience, but harm?

That is your business, of course. I'm just saying I can't fathom how that could be. If you were, say, allergic to wheat, would that hurt your family?

It would, but I would not be the cause in that case.

Bare with me please, because I am slowly coming to an epiphany. I will start discussing it in a latter post.

Humans believe they can judge what is right and what is wrong for others. This is a very serious distortion. It's a big part of our insanity.

Laws can certainly become corrupted. But at their best, laws are supposed to protect everyone. The best laws subscribe to the adage "One person freedom ends where another's begins."

The sticking point here is whether animals have any rights to begin with, just as there is the same sticking point in the abortion issue.

I am currently re-evaluating my views on this, like I am for activism.

This brings us back to treatment of animals. You believe eating meat signifies our intent to support bad treatment. I do not believe the same.

IMHO you would get better results by fighting for animal being treated with compassion than fighting to stop people from eating meat.

I already agreed to work together on our common ground. But for purposes of this discussion, which is philosophical, I don't see how killing an entity could be 'not bad treatment.'

The only way to not consider it bad treatment is if the entity is considered to have no value as an entity.

I think we will have to discuss euthanasia to make inroads on this one.

Then let people make up their own conclusions about meat eating. Only the self can do this work.

"Let?"

I cannot "let" or prevent anyone from making their own conclusions. I'm not going to quit expressing my own opinion, just because others disagree with it.

And again, what's with this "you aren't letting me eat meat" thing again? How is me expressing my own opinion stopping you from eating meat in any way?

We keep coming back to this. The vegetarians aren't being accepted. We are being accused of trying to control others, despite the fact that it's quite impossible. And we are essentially being asked to give up our convictions.

There is a misunderstanding here. Maybe it came from English not being my first language. What I meant was that equating meat eating with supporting factory farming is not letting people reach such a conclusion by themselves. I'm not saying that I agree with such a conclusion, but it would certainly help your cause if people started equating meat eating with maltreatment of animals for themselves. I am simply saying that IMHO concentrating your arguments on the treatment of animals without implying that meat eater are supporting it, would give much more of the results you are after, with much less efforts on the part of the activists.

Maybe, but you do not understand my point of view on the subject. Plants wanting to die or not is very relevant to me!

Do you realize that plants have a mind with emotions ? The mind does not require a physical brain. They are mind/body complexes, just like animals.

No, they're not just like animals. There is a world of difference, but I'm not going back down that road again. Please read the thread if you wish to know my opinion on that.

The point about comparing plants to animals always goes back to this:

Even IF plants feel pain too, that isn't a justification for eating animals, because more plants are killed, to feed the animals. Fewer plants would be killed by eating the plants directly. And all the other reasons I already outlined, but just this reason alone is enough to negate that whole argument.

I'm not really talking about pain here. Just the wanting to die or not. I understand your point of view. I agree to let it go.

Is not killing someone poor treatment?

That's an interesting question.

We could discuss it more.

Valtor, are you really seriously suggesting that we discuss whether killing someone is poor treatment?

What has happened here? Have Law of One principles been so misunderstood, or so corrupted, not sure which, that we must now debate whether killing humans is ok?

(shakes head incredulously)

I won't bring plants again. But I think discussing euthanasia would make inroads here too. It all comes down to intent.

Is killing someone even treating someone in any way ? Maybe you are asking if killing someone is right or wrong?

I'm probably just stuck on semantics here Monica. Because I'm felling sorrow right now. Which means our misunderstandings are hurting us both. I don't like that.

I was implying that this is happening right here and now in our current collective illusion.

I don't think so. I don't think young 3D souls are being allowed to incarnate here at this nexus, so close to harvest. It makes more sense to me that they'd be taken to another planet, so they can begin their 3D cycle.

I meant the 2d part of our 3d illusion. The 2d mind/body complexes getting catalysts from us.

I believe we do not have the same understanding of the purpose of our 3d illusion here on Earth. It's a game that humans take very seriously.

If you see it as just a game, then you're right: we don't have the same understanding at all. Our very foundation is so different, that understanding might be very difficult.

We are ONE you and I, Monica. Yes really!

This is what I mean: "You cannot remember your hand, their hands, perhaps even the rules of this game. This game can only be won by those who lose their cards in the melting influence of love; can only be won by those who lay their pleasures, their limitations, their all upon the table face up and say inwardly: “All, all of you players, each other-self, whatever your hand, I love you.” This is the game: to know, to accept, to forgive, to balance, and to open the self in love. This cannot be done without the forgetting, for it would carry no weight in the life of the mind/body/spirit beingness totality."

THIS is what I am trying to express with every one of my posts.

Then those treating animals this way, if aware, are maybe the STS entities you're talking about.

Either that, or they're just really blocked up or ignorant.

But eating meat produced in such way - and this includes ANY visit to virtually any restaurant - is sharing in the responsibility in that STS action.

I would include "blocked up or ignorant" in the unaware group.

I do not agree on your second statement.

So, are you saying you don't agree that our purchases support industry? If we knowingly buy a product produced by slave labor, we aren't contributing to slave labor?

That's what I'm saying yes. Your intent when you buy it is what counts. Incidentally, I also do not believe that we can vote with our wallets.

If I am understanding you correctly, then yes, our paradigms are worlds apart. I believe in taking responsibility for our choices.

I too believe in taking responsibility for my choices. If I'm wrong and there is such a thing as objective rightness and wrongness, then I guess I'll be very surprised when I wake up in time/space of a new 3d cycle somewhere else.

I believe the sum total of this choice (stop eating meat) would actually result in a net loss of compassion. As hard as this may be to believe from your perspective. You cannot know my situation.

I don't need to know your situation, because I'm not judging your choices. So there is no need to even explain anything to me about your choices. They are your own responsibility, not mine. I am only commenting to your own comments, which you offered voluntarily. I have never asked you anything about your personal situation, except in response to that which you offered yourself.

This last sentence of mine "You cannot know my situation" was out of line. I offer you my apology.