In regards to eating meat

[Tenet Nosce]

Monica- You are on ignore because:

1. I actually did respond to your points about toxins, and in a quite agreeable fashion.

2. You made a patently false claim about whether or not certain things were said in this thread. Then when I provided the quotes to back up my statement which you challenged, you flew off the handle and got "offended", all the while claiming that it was actually me who was flying off the handle and getting offended. Personally, I don't find this behavior conducive to any sort of real communication. It amounts to nothing more than shadow boxing.

3. You have consistently misrepresented what I have said in this thread, and despite repeated correction, you persist. Not once have I told people that they need to eat meat. Not once have I defended the manner in which most animals are raised for meat. Not once have I said that a vegan diet is inherently wrong, or that it is impossible for a vegan to be vibrantly healthy.

4. The only thing I have ever railed about in this thread is the notion that veganism is right for everybody. If some Paleo or Atkins fanatic came into the thread saying that everybody needs to consume animal flesh, I would be just as adamant in arguing against them.

[Monica]

Monica- You are on ignore because:

How nice. So Tenet will be missing all the 'right up his alley' data I just posted. Oh well. His loss. After all, those who wish to stay ignorant of certain info, may do so. We cannot infringe on their free will.

I will reply anyway, just for the off-chance his curiosity gets the better of him.

1. I actually did respond to your points about toxins, and in a quite agreeable fashion.

Turning an intellectual discussion into something personal isn't agreeable.

2. You made a patently false claim about whether or not certain things were said in this thread.

Maybe, maybe not. Doesn't matter. We all make mistakes, don't we?

Then when I provided the quotes to back up my statement which you challenged- you flew off the handle and got "offended".

My dear Tenet, to say I got offended because you provided quotes is ridiculous and you know that. I never get offended because someone backs something up. I told you exactly why I got offended, and you completely ignored me.

But no matter...if you think it's ok to go around saying confrontational things to people, about them personally, and then not care if they're offended, well, it doesn't matter to the Creator anyway, right? Nothing matters anyway, right? So there's no need to care about other people's silly feelings.

Personally, I don't find this behavior conducive to any sort of real communication.

I don't find your confrontational style conducive, so I guess we're even, eh?

[Ankh]

Personally, I don't find this behavior conducive to any sort of real communication.

I don't find your confrontational style conducive, so I guess we're even, eh?

Aww... That's too bad that both of you can not meet each other, and continue this discussion... I was very interested!

[Tenet Nosce]

I don't find your confrontational style conducive, so I guess we're even, eh?

That's really curious, seeing as how you have communicated to me on more than one occasion that you appreciate my confrontational style. I guess what you meant is that you only appreciate it when it supports your own views.

[Monica]

That's really curious, seeing as how you have communicated to me on more than one occasion that you appreciate my confrontational style. I guess what you meant is that you only appreciate it when it supports your own views.

Then you guessed wrong.

I appreciate your bold, confrontational style when it's directed at ideas.

NOT when it's directed at individual people.

[Tenet Nosce]

I appreciate your bold, confrontational style when it's directed at ideas.

NOT when it's directed at individual people.

Sounds to me like you are confusing ideas with personhood. There was no attack on your value as a human being, or yossarian's, or anybody else's for that matter. I'm truly sorry if it appeared that way to you, but I am not going to apologize for an intention I didn't have.

You have said multiple times in this thread that you want to "understand" how a spiritually-inclined person can eat meat and be O.K. with it. If you are willing to offer some thoughts are to how this has become more understandable to you somewhere in the 104 pages of this thread, I am interested to hear them. Otherwise, I stand by my statement to the effect that meat eating appears to be "not understandable" to you.

That is not a personal attack. If you truly believe that meat-eating is "not understandable" from a spiritual perspective, then you are perfectly entitled to your belief.

[Monica]

Sounds to me like you are confusing ideas with personhood. There was no attack on your value as a human being, or yossarian's,

Well I'm not going to go back and quote you. But I do invite you to reread what you wrote, and think about how it sounds to the other person. Clue: when you use the word 'you' a lot, as in "you do xyz" that is making it personal.

or anybody else's for that matter. I'm truly sorry if it appeared that way to you, but I am not going to apologize for an intention I didn't have.

ok

You have said multiple times in this thread that you want to "understand" how a spiritually-inclined person can eat meat and be O.K. with it. If you are willing to offer some thoughts are to how this has become more understandable to you somewhere in the 104 pages of this thread, I am interested to hear them. Otherwise, I stand by my statement to the effect that meat eating appears to be "not understandable" to you.

I think I understand it now. It's denial. Case in point: How many of the meat-eaters have had the courage to watch the slaughterhouse videos I posted?

Anyone?

If eating animals is no big deal, then watching the reality of how they are tortured and killed, should be no big deal.

After all, it is TRUTH. Those videos are real. Sure, maybe the person filming was under cover. Doesn't matter. The video footage is still real.

No big deal.

I have immense respect for Austin, because he is fully aware of the reality and is doing something about it. And for yossarian, who is also fully aware of the impact of his choices.

[drifting pages]

What is this ?????? i mean... WHAT :::::???

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Xc5wIpUenQ

yuck

[Tenet Nosce]

I think I understand it now. It's denial.

What constitutes denial is repeatedly ignoring, or misstating, another person's views.

I've already told you multiple times in this thread that I do not purchase meat that is factory farmed.

I've already told you that I am not "against" a vegan diet, or that I believe it is inherently unhealthy.

I've already told you that I don't think everybody "should" eat meat, and that I never tell people to start eating meat if they have chosen not to.

I've already told you that I like Dr. Cousens approach, and that I am particularly interested in using algae to reduce meat cravings.

Yet- you persist in mischaracterizing my views. Why is this?

[drifting pages]

Is anyone aware of the http://www.certifiedhumane.org/

I have this here in Brazil as well, in my state (são Paulo) there are farms and slaughter houses following this.

I saw a news article that said the Europe Union won't buy meat that is not produced in this way starting 2012.

Edit: Here is the Brazilian website http://www.ecocert.com.br/bem_estar_animal.html

[Tenet Nosce]

Is anyone aware of the http://www.certifiedhumane.org/

I have this here in Brazil as well, in my state (são Paulo) there are farms and slaughter houses following this.

I saw a news article that said the Europe Union won't buy meat that is not produced in this way starting 2012.

This looks like a great program! Here is a video I found on the organization and their practices. Thanks for sharing!

[Monica]

What constitutes denial is repeatedly ignoring, or misstating, another person's views.

I wouldn't call that denial. I'd call that poor communication and/or misinterpretation, both of which are usually the responsibility of both parties involved.

It's not necessary to fling back at me everything I say, Tenet. You asked me a question about what I thought was the reason spiritual seekers can still eat meat.

I answered that I think it's denial, in many cases. I even gave a couple of exceptions.

For you to now toss that back at me, to say I am in denial for not agreeing with your views, seems a bit tit-for-tat.

I also find it amusing that you say I'm "ignoring" your posts, when I respond to every line, point-by-point, 99% of the time.

If we were to have a contest, I could prove that you have ignored a lot more of my points, than I have of yours.

But thankfully, we're not having a contest, are we?

In fact, you even fussed at me for responding to some of your posts that you didn't want me responding to! So that's even more amusing!

I've already told you multiple times in this thread that I do not purchase meat that is factory farmed.

LOL! Now who's taking things personally?

I took it personally when you were referring to me specifically. I could tell this by your choice of words. Just as you referred to yossarian personally.

But in this case, I wasn't even referring to YOU personally! I was referring to spiritually-oriented meat-eaters in general.

Why, then, are you taking it personally?

And, why are you even telling me about your personal dietary choices? Are you, perhaps, in "denial" about the 29 times I have stated in this thread that I'm not interested in analyzing or assessing anyone's personal diet?

Quite frankly, Tenet, I really don't care what you eat. And I'm really not paying attention to who eats what, or where they get their meat, or whatever. Dozens of people have come and gone in this thread. I can't be expected to remember everyone's personal dietary choices, especially when I'm not even interested in that.

I've already told you that I am not "against" a vegan diet, or that I believe it is inherently unhealthy.

I've already told you that I don't think everybody "should" eat meat, and that I never tell people to start eating meat if they have chosen not to.

I've already told you that I like Dr. Cousens approach, and that I am particularly interested in using algae to reduce meat cravings.

Yet- you persist in mischaracterizing my views. Why is this?

Um, not sure what you're getting at here. I never said you said any of those things, so I have no idea what I supposedly mischaracterized.

I simply answered your question. Not a single meat-eater has come forward to say they've watched the slaughterhouse videos. (Except Austin, whom I know is already quite aware of it, and probably yossarian.)

That's fine. They don't have to if they don't want to. I'm just backing up why I think it's denial, in answer to your question.

[Tenet Nosce]

Why, then, are you taking it personally?

Why, then, are you still telling me how I feel? I'm not interpreting your comments as a personal attack. Were they intended as such?

I've already watched enough slaughterhouse videos for me to decide to no longer purchase factory farmed meat from grocery stores. What would be the purpose in watching more of them now?

I've also seen videos of animals slaughtered on an organic farm, and was fine with it. I didn't have the same emotional reaction to it as the other ones.

Generally speaking, I have more of an emotional reaction toward the slaughter of cows, rather than chickens. I couldn't give a rat's behind about fish and seafood. No emotional reaction there.

As for insects, the thought of eating them disgusts me more than the thought of killing them for food.

Is this acceptable to you? Do you "understand" how I could feel this way and still be a "spiritual" person?

Perhaps more relevant to this forum- do you feel this is an "acceptable" view to the One Infinite Creator? Does this "resonate" with the Law of One? Or should I feel something different than what I feel in order to "make the grade"?

[Monica]

Why, then, are you still telling me how I feel? I'm not interpreting your comments as a personal attack.

Because you made 7 "I" statements and 1 "my" statement in your last post. Every sentence, actually, with 2 statements per sentence.

Is that acceptable to you?

I can only interpret this as sarcasm, being that in my last post I restated again that I'm not interested in assessing anyone's choices.

[BrownEye]

I will interject something for thought, from a different angle.

I sometimes check a person on a mechanic/energetic level. Everyone has issues that stem from belief, whether that is dark energy, dark entity attachments, or blockages.

While Monica may appear to be something we "believe", i have found her signature to be fully clear and open with no blockages or negative energies, maybe a bit overdriven in the heart chakra. The only other person i have come across in this condition is Daydreamin.

Something to think about.

[Tenet Nosce]

Because you made 7 "I" statements and 1 "my" statement in your last post. Every sentence, actually, with 2 statements per sentence.

Thanks for clarifying. Then, allow me to remind you that this entire side conversation/circus act was rooted in this statement by you:

I haven't seen anyone dictate a particular diet for any particular person, in this entire discussion. So I really don't know what you're referring to.

To which I replied with quotes from three people, one of them being you. Then, you said that you were too "weary" to respond to my post, and then perform some kind of mental ninjitsu whereby I am getting "too personal" by responding directly to your statement that you haven't seen "anyone" do this, with direct quotes from those people.

How, then, should I have responded to that statement? Perhaps you could offer me a more harmonious way to accomplish this communication.

I can only interpret this as sarcasm, being that in my last post I restated again that I'm not interested in assessing anyone's choices.

The fact that you "can only interpret this as sarcasm" is exactly the energy which is co-creating this conflict. For my part, it is a failure to accept fanaticism.

[Monica]

I sometimes check a person on a mechanic/energetic level. Everyone has issues that stem from belief, whether that is dark energy, dark entity attachments, or blockages.

While Monica may appear to be something we "believe", i have found her signature to be fully clear and open with no blockages or negative energies, maybe a bit overdriven in the heart chakra. The only other person i have come across in this condition is Daydreamin.

Wow, that's really interesting, Pickle! I don't quite know what to say so I'll just say thanks for sharing!

[BrownEye]

Careful of pride resulting from what i said. That can cause things to go out of whack.

Something that just came to me. Your activist background radiates the heart in overdrive.

Keep this in mind with issues told to Carla as well. Heart in overdrive with the upper chakras not yet activated.

---

That was a part of her health issues.

[Monica]

allow me to remind you that this entire side conversation/circus act was rooted in this statement by you:

I haven't seen anyone dictate a particular diet for any particular person, in this entire discussion. So I really don't know what you're referring to.

I stand by that statement. I don't recall anyone saying to anyone else "you should eat such and such diet."

Making a general statement "xyz diet is best for everyone" is - a general statement. Directed at people generally. NOT directed at anyone specifically.

Do you see the difference?

To which I replied with quotes from three people, one of them being you. Then, you said that you were too "weary" to respond to my post, and then perform some kind of mental ninjitsu whereby I am getting "too personal" by responding directly to your statement that you haven't seen "anyone" do this, with direct quotes from those people.

I explained why I was wearying of this discussion - because several times you asked me about something which had been previously discussed.

I'm too busy to spend time digging up old posts or repeating what's already been said.

If you thought it was because of that single statement, you were mistaken. I hope my clarification about 'specifically directed' clears that up.

The fact that you "can only interpret this as sarcasm" is exactly the energy which is co-creating this conflict.

I'm open to considering alternative explanations, if you have any to offer! I just didn't see any at the time.

---

Careful of pride resulting from what i said. That can cause things to go out of whack.

Noted! (feeling sufficiently chagrined) Good advice! I will endeavor to heed it.

Something that just came to me. Your activist background radiates the heart in overdrive.

Keep this in mind with issues told to Carla as well. Heart in overdrive with the upper chakras not yet activated.

---

That was a part of her health issues.

Aha! Thank you. I will keep that in mind also.

[yossarian]

I will interject something for thought, from a different angle.

I sometimes check a person on a mechanic/energetic level. Everyone has issues that stem from belief, whether that is dark energy, dark entity attachments, or blockages.

While Monica may appear to be something we "believe", i have found her signature to be fully clear and open with no blockages or negative energies, maybe a bit overdriven in the heart chakra. The only other person i have come across in this condition is Daydreamin.

Something to think about.

Have you ever done this to me? I want to know about my dark entity attachments and stuff!

[Tenet Nosce]

I stand by that statement. I don't recall anyone saying to anyone else "you should eat such and such diet."

Making a general statement "xyz diet is best for everyone" is - a general statement. Directed at people generally. NOT directed at anyone specifically.

Do you see the difference?

Yes, I see what you are talking about. However, I didn't view yossarian's initial response to Clordio as a "general statement". It appeared to me to be a direct response to Clordio, and in fact I count the word "you" in the response 9 times. So according to your own theory, that is proof that yossarian was speaking directly to Clordio. As in giving him direct advice.

Perhaps yossarian can enlighten us as to his intent. I'm willing to accept that I interpreted the post incorrectly.

I hope my clarification about 'specifically directed' clears that up.

Well yes, it does. I can see how you meant the words differently than I read them. So, to that degree yes.

I'm open to considering alternative explanations, if you have any to offer! I just didn't see any at the time.

The alternative explanation would be that when I read Clordio's post opening with "I am very conflicted..." then I read yossarian's reply I felt it was a direct response to Clordio telling him what to eat and not eat.

[Monica]

Well yes, it does. I can see how you meant the words differently than I read them. So, to that degree yes.

Coolness!

The alternative explanation would be that when I read Clordio's post opening with "I am very conflicted..." then I read yossarian's reply I felt it was a direct response to Clordio telling him what to eat and not eat.

Ohhhhh! In thaaaaaaat case, sure, but the difference is that Clorido asked for advice.

That makes all the difference in the world!

If someone asks me directly what I think about whatever, I have full freedom to offer my opinion truthfully. Apparently, that's what happened in this case: Clorido asked and yossarian answered.

When I said I didn't recall anyone telling anyone specifically what to eat, I meant unsolicited. I don't recall anyone saying "John, you should follow xyz diet and it will clear up your xyz illness." I don't recall anyone doing that.

I may be wrong. After 3 years, it's possible I just don't remember that happening.

[Shemaya]

Yes, Monica I have also viewed slaughterhouse videos, did not watch the ones you posted because I had watched another the day before, and other videos prior to that, and I am busy also, as you are.
I know all about the daily suffering that occurs on this planet, animals, humans. My focus and work in life has been more on humans, though I love animals. Working with humans is draining. I just came home from a 9 hour work day with patients....the work is physical, but then there are all the social/ emotional/ psyche issues that complicate things.

Is there something specific that you want me to know regarding the videos you posted? I probably won't have time to view them, a summary would be helpful.

[yossarian]

I personally don't think there's anything wrong with telling people what they should eat. I don't know if I did that or not, but if I did I basically think it's okay albeit probably rude.

If that's against forum rules, I completely understand. But my attitude about what constitutes morally acceptable social behaviour is far broader than most forum rules. And I'm okay with that.

[Monica]

I personally don't think there's anything wrong with telling people what they should eat. I don't know if I did that or not, but if I did I basically think it's okay albeit probably rude.

If that's against forum rules, I completely understand. But my attitude about what constitutes morally acceptable social behaviour is far broader than most forum rules. And I'm okay with that.

You didn't break any rules, yossarian.

---

Yes, Monica I have also viewed slaughterhouse videos, did not watch the ones you posted because I had watched another the day before, and other videos prior to that, and I am busy also, as you are.
I know all about the daily suffering that occurs on this planet, animals, humans. My focus and work in life has been more on humans, though I love animals. Working with humans is draining. I just came home from a 9 hour work day with patients....the work is physical, but then there are all the social/ emotional/ psyche issues that complicate things.

I have no comment on the work that you do, other than to say that we each must do the work we are guided to do.

I asked the question about whether any of the meat-eaters had watched slaughterhouse videos, in response to Tenet's question.

I was trying to differentiate between someone burying their head in the sand, and eating animals while oblivious to their suffering, vs. someone who confronts the suffering head-on and then makes their decision accordingly.

What they decide, after watching the videos, is up to them, and isn't my concern.

Is there something specific that you want me to know regarding the videos you posted? I probably won't have time to view them, a summary would be helpful.

They are impossible to summarize, sorry.

[BrownEye]

Have you ever done this to me? I want to know about my dark entity attachments and stuff!

LoL no i haven't. It is only curiousity as a way to understand where a person may be coming from.

Monica came across as the "zealot" type to me at first, so i expected there to be blockages. She is activated up to the heart, with no blockages. This is the source of energy for the activism. Very similar to Carla from Ra's description.

Looking into this has opened my eyes to the meaning of "follow your heart". So many think it means to follow urges or self indulgence. It seems that it really means to follow the power of the heart chakra.

I think i will be putting more effort into developing these other senses, it is a huge help in understanding things.

[Shemaya]

I eat animals and am not oblivious to suffering. I am very grateful for their sacrifice that nourishes me.

I asked Gaia once about this, and her answer was that the when animals are preyed upon, they are immediately caught back up to Spirit where they become immediately aware of the perfection of creation. Here's a what I wrote previously :

"

It resonated with the answer I received from Gaia when I asked a question regarding predator/prey relationship. I was asking in the context that humans live as omnivores, and we see animals hunting each other for food in the circle of life. I asked Gaia if the predator/prey dynamic caused her any distress.

She responded with surprise that I would think it caused her distress. She said that animals have no discontinuity of their spirit and body. When the body dies, the spirit is immediately released to Eternal Spirit, and the animal understands this circle, that by it's death it gives life to another.

So to me, Q'uo response resonates in that it gives us as humans an active step, prayer and thanksgiving, to acknowledge the gift of life we are given by the food that we eat.

I didn't feel that Q'uo's response endorsed or excused the terrible, life-robbing system we have created in the meat industry, factory farms, and slaughterhouses. I am glad for the many people who feel passionate about this, who bring awareness and are taking active steps to end it.

All of us can be more conscious of where we buy our food, there is a movement afoot now to localize food production, get away from agribusiness, and get back to home gardens and local farms. When we stop, as a collective, supporting factory farming (by no longer buying from them!) they can't survive....we, as a collective, keep them going by our purchases."

[Tenet Nosce]

If someone asks me directly what I think about whatever, I have full freedom to offer my opinion truthfully. Apparently, that's what happened in this case: Clorido asked and yossarian answered.

Yes, yossarian answered. Which is within his full freedom to do! As was my full freedom to give my opinion on his opinion. My opinion was that his advice could be potentially dangerous due to the recommendation of 25 grams of protein a day. My further opinion was on the concept of zealotry- where it came from and how it feeds into the issue of food.

This, in a nutshell, conveys what I was attempting to say in my first post in this thread. You and Pickle jumped all over it like white on rice, and have been at it ever since, slapping high-fives all along the way. It has been quite the show! You two should take your act on the road!

(That was a half-joking, half-serious, non-factual opinion.)

When I said I didn't recall anyone telling anyone specifically what to eat, I meant unsolicited. I don't recall anyone saying "John, you should follow xyz diet and it will clear up your xyz illness." I don't recall anyone doing that.

If you were only talking about unsolicited advice, then this is the source of our seeming disagreement over the past few days, as I was speaking of the giving of soliticed advice. I'm glad that is settled. Thanks for your persistence.

[Bring4th_Austin]

Is anyone aware of the http://www.certifiedhumane.org/

I have this here in Brazil as well, in my state (são Paulo) there are farms and slaughter houses following this.

I saw a news article that said the Europe Union won't buy meat that is not produced in this way starting 2012.

This looks like a great program! Here is a video I found on the organization and their practices. Thanks for sharing!

For anyone interesting in comparing different animal welfare certification programs, here's a very comprehensive comparison chart:

http://ngfn.org/resources/ngfn-database/...pendix.pdf

The highest standards are from the Animal Welfare Approved organization, which is what we are certified (to toot my own horn just a bit ).

And for anyone wondering exactly how certain standards are decided, why certain things are considered "humane" and others not, or how the idea of humane animal husbandry came around, I would suggest doing some research on Dr. Temple Grandin. There is a movie about her which is amazing. She pioneered research into the psychological state of animals in the meat industry and helped develop standards which would keep animals within a calm and natural state of mind throughout the entire cycle. Much emphasis was placed on eliminating fear, anxiety, and nervousness.

[Shemaya]

Really helpful info , drifting pages, Tenet, and Austin. Thank you so much for posting that, I watched the video and it was uplifting and inspiring for me, so good to see people making the needed changes