Cats and Kittens

[Ashim]

Dear friends, please help me on this one.
I really enjoy the company of our 2D pets here on earth and have a request to the forum to help solve a problem regarding our pet.
Our feline friend (luci) has only been with us 8 months but is showing signs of being 'horny', for want of a better term.
My wife in convinced that the world of cats would be better served if Luci were made sterile.
I however wish to grant her (the cat) the chance to experience motherhood and am thus at loss for words.

She (Luci the cat) told me that she would like to experience life in the full.

What is the 'right' thing to do?

Love & Light

[Monica]

Yikes! What a dilemma! How wonderful that you are seeking to honor Luci's wishes by allowing her to experience motherhood.

My opinion might sound a bit biased, because I work to educate people about the overpopulation problem and definitely believe in 'fixing' our pets, for the sake of reducing animal suffering and death. But here goes:

What would you do with all the kittens? Many people assume that they'll just give the cute kittens away to loving homes, but the reality is that there are more cute kittens than there are loving homes looking for kittens. The animal shelters are full of kittens that never get adopted and end up getting killed.

If you keep all the kittens, then the challenge here is that kittens turn into cats, who then might also wish to experience motherhood, which would result in more kittens, who would then turn into cats who...you get the idea.

If the world weren't already so overpopulated with cats, I'd say go for it! But the sad reality is that millions upon millions of unwanted cats are killed every year. Sterilizing our pets is the only way to help reduce the number of cats who multiply and end up being killed.

Since you have such a good communication with Luci, I would suggest explaining to her that motherhood this time around just isn't practical, and by getting sterilized she might actually evolve more spiritually. It could just be her first experience with compassion! I've often thought that the way we treat our animals influences what kind of human they will be in their next life, after they graduate to 3D. (That's why I don't let my dogs bully one another...they say it's normal dog behavior, but these dogs are almost human! What kind of humans will they be if I allow such behavior?)

Whenever we make one choice, we eliminate other choices, at least for the time being. Here's an idea: Instead of letting Luci multiply, why not visit an animal shelter and adopt a couple of cute, homeless kittens? That way you'd be giving a home to kittens who otherwise might lose their lives.

Luci will hiss at them at first. That's normal. But within a few days she'll be tolerating them, and within a few weeks will likely be grooming them. So even though she misses biological motherhood, she could have a different 'rich' experience!

~The Cat Lady

[Ashim]

She (my wife) said that Monica spoke eternal truth.
Because I rarely offer resistance to her (my wives) commands I shall heed this advice.

She (Luci) is very grateful for the consideration.

As am I.

Love & Light

[Monica]

Purrrrrrrfect!

~The Cat Lady

[Ali Quadir]

Well nothing left but something to celebrate the life of kittens in general then?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qit3ALTelOo

[Plenum]

this sounds like a truly harsh decision to ponder.

how man relates to the animal world says a lot about the internals of our being.

[Oceania]

the adoption idea is great. too bad it's true about the overpop kittens. i'd love to adopt them all.

[Aureus]

I think the correct action is beyond our level of calculation. As long as the intention is pure in its desired goal, one should be fine.

It's true that the animal is the Creator. The question is how much of the human exists in the animal. There is no right or wrong. There is awareness leading to choice leading to experience leading to learning/integrating.

Something like that would be my words.

[Bang Kaew]

i just read the following q'uote about cats so rather than start a new thread thought I would post here...

Cats have always been attracted to me even when I didn't like them. Going on the below q'uote it's possible that this is due to my having a few entities hanging around me. Would stray cats be attracted to good or bad entities. I am hoping that is a stupid question!

Also do dogs have the same ability?

Thanks in advance

Carla: Could you comment on how aware cats in our household are of these contacts, if they are able to participate in any way?

I am Q’uo, and am aware of your query, my sister. The entities that you refer to as the cats are quite sensitive to not only our presence and others of the Confederation of Planets in the Service to the One Creator, but are also sensitive to the negatively oriented that would offer their service in their own way. The feline entities have, throughout the history of your peoples, been seen by those of a metaphysical sensitivity as being able to perceive much which is unseen to your physical eye. The cat has been utilized as the guardian of many temples in the past of the Egyptian race of your peoples. For this reason and because of the sensitivity of the cat entities, the negatively oriented entities find some difficulty in offering the full impact of their services when the feline entities are present, for there is a natural kind of guarding or protection that is offered by the cat entities. They are not always aware of each entity as an individualized portion or person as they are aware of you in that nature, but are often aware of a feeling tone or attitude or ambiance that has changed or has a certain quality.

Thus, it is sometimes as if these creatures sense a presence as you would hear a certain sound that would alert you to activity. The cat entity, however, is also able to ascertain the nature of the presence, whether it is beneficial or deleterious, and will respond differently to each of these qualities.

Is there a further query, my sister?

Carla: Are they, then, beginning to develop their own biases toward the positive or the negative path at this point?

I am Q’uo, and am aware of your query, my sister. In some cases this is so, especially those cases in which a cat entity is invested in the position as a pet, as we find in this domicile there are six such entities. In other cases, it is possible for the cat entity to become aware of the presence of unseen entities and simply be aware that a presence is there, much as they are aware you are in their presence when you are indeed in their presence. Their beginning bias toward one polarity or the other, then, is a function of the quality of investment, shall we say, that has been given to them.

Is there a further query, my sister?

Carla: Is there a (inaudible) that in our participation (inaudible) that would aid them in the investment process? And also I am assuming that our contributions toward investment is a service that we perform?

I am Q’uo, and am aware of your query, my sister. The participation of the cat entities in these meditations enhances this investment quality in that they share their experience with you and with us. The nature of investment is that the quality of beingness of a greater energy source, shall we say, is manifested in a direct fashion that is the proximity of one presence to another with the motivation being to share freely of the self or to radiate a certain vibration or information that then will find a resonance with the essence or basic quality of the entities with whom the vibration or information is shared. Thus, though the cat entities are not able to perceive in a mental or spiritual nature in the same manner as are you that which is shared in these meditations, they are aware of and receptive to the basic frequency of vibration that is radiated in a resonate fashion with their own essence.

http://www.llresearch.org/transcripts/is..._1231.aspx

[Shin'Ar]

What would be the difference between spaying and neutering our pets, and the Chinese government imposing laws where a mother could only bear one child, or that Indian female children can be murdered so that the family can attempt to have a more beneficial male offspring?

When does the human gain authority to impose its will upon others regarding natural reproduction?

I would suggest that all females should inherently have the right to experience motherhood and evolve their maternal attributes at least once in a lifetime. It is the most biologically prominent aspect of being female.

But with regard to overpopulation, in nature such things are controlled naturally. When there are too many rabbits, the fox population increases. And vice versa.

Diseases associated with specific species also has a way of controlling populations.

Does overpopulation affect others in adverse ways? of course it does, but I am certainly glad that the animals have not figured out a way to control the overpopulation of the billions of humans that are far more adversely affecting our home planet than any of them are.

i have two dogs of both genders, and both are fixed. I personally do not want animals messing the inside of my home, and I feel the obligation to society is more of a priority than the natural experiences of my pets. However I do so in full awareness that I impose my own power over a being of less power enslaving it to my desires. I must live with this decision as I do all the choices I make in life, but I do try to make sure that I do not make such decisions lightly of simply because that is what the Jones's are doing.

[Monica]

When does the human gain authority to impose its will upon others regarding natural reproduction?

The answer is simple: domesticated animals are dependent on humans for their survival. If cats and dogs are allowed to multiply, they end up starving or killed at animal 'shelters.'

Rightly or wrongly, at this point in time we are their stewards. I would rather sterilize my pets than have them starve or die.

http://www.afocinc.org/html/how_2_cats_multiply.html

Statistics show 70,000 puppies and kittens are
born each day for every 10,000 human births.
There simply aren’t enough homes for all these
animals. As a result, 7,000,000 animals are
euthanized every year.
It’s easy to see how the numbers of dogs and
cats get out of hand. For example, if a cat has
two litters per year, that one cat and its
offspring will produce more than 11 million cats
in nine years.
Two litters per year, with 2.8 surviving kittens
per litter,can total:
 
1 year, 1 cat:---------12
2 years:----------------67
3 years:----------------376
4 years:----------------2,107
5 years:----------------11,801
6 years:----------------66,088
7 years:----------------370,092
8 years:----------------2,072,514
9 years:----------------11,606,077
More than 11 million cats !
 
Given these statistics, the only way to break this
chain is by altering our animals. But if that’s not
reason enough, there are many reasons
why spaying and neutering is a good idea.

http://www.humanesociety.org/issues/pet_overpopulation/

Four million cats and dogs—about one every eight seconds—are put down in U.S. shelters each year. Often these animals are the offspring of cherished family pets.

More:

http://www.almosthomerescue.org/spayneut...neuter.htm

http://www.paws.org/why-spay-neuter.html

Quite simply, spaying/neutering is the equivalent of human contraception. It's necessary.

I do so in full awareness that I impose my own power over a being of less power enslaving it to my desires.

I see it more as taking care of children. Sort of like taking care to not let one's 13-year-old daughter get pregnant.

[Shin'Ar]

I see it more as taking care of children. Sort of like taking care to not let one's 13-year-old daughter get pregnant.

if there were any similarity there you would have to compare it to having your daughter sterilized so that she would not have the option of becoming pregnant.

You touch on a facet of pets versus wild animals here though in that we have domesticated these wild animals and it is in a way our fault that nature does not act upon their existence in the way that it would if they had remained wild.

But I do not see the human as the steward of the animal kingdom. And it is not your own pet that will starve and die because of overpopulation. It is their offspring. The sterilization process is just insurance for protection against what happens if one does not properly monitor their pets or if mistakes occur. The true problem of inattentive and irresponsible pet owners is not solved. Sterilization solves the problem of our pets getting pregnant, but it does not solve the problem of our own irresponsibility.

Breeders do not have such problems because they are extremely attentive to ensuring an environment for their pets whereby their selective breeding process is not tainted. They neither have a population problem nor are any of their pets sterilized so that they can run free without concern.

[Ashim]

Hey, thanks for the replies.
Luci has now been joined by Merlin, both are sterile and do a good job of keeping the rodent population in a constant state of fear.
The only down side of this is that as we live in a corner of a forest the cats have literaly unlimited prey. Sometimes Merlin will return home with animals with which we are not even familiar and have to look up. The most recent 'kill' was a 'siebenschläfer' a type of rodent with a fluffy tail.
After losing a back leg in a car accident I thought he would be less of a threat to the rest of nature but I was wrong, it has had no effect, he still manages about 5 or 6 mice a day, the odd bird, squirrel, frog or whatever mother nature has on the menu that day.
We feed him enough, it just seems he's a hunter.

[Monica]

if there were any similarity there you would have to compare it to having your daughter sterilized so that she would not have the option of becoming pregnant.

I disagree. There isn't a contraception option for animals other than sterilization. So the bottom line is that if we want to avoid contributing to pet overpopulation, we have to sterilize them.

You touch on a facet of pets versus wild animals here though in that we have domesticated these wild animals and it is in a way our fault that nature does not act upon their existence in the way that it would if they had remained wild.

I'd say it's way more than "in a way" but in fact humans are totally responsible.

But I do not see the human as the steward of the animal kingdom.

Not the entire animal kingdom...not wild animals, but pets? How are we not stewards of our dogs and cats? They are dependent on us. They have no wild environment.

And it is not your own pet that will starve and die because of overpopulation. It is their offspring.

We are still responsible if we allow our pets to multiply.

The sterilization process is just insurance for protection against what happens if one does not properly monitor their pets or if mistakes occur.

The only way to "monitor" pets and prevent "mistakes" is to keep the males and females separated. Unbred cats and dogs are extremely uncomfortable. Females can continue going into heat repeatedly, and if they don't get their needs satisfied, they can have health problems because of it. Not to mention, without getting too graphic, imagine being aroused repeatedly with no relief. To subject them to that would be cruel.

The true problem of inattentive and irresponsible pet owners is not solved. Sterilization solves the problem of our pets getting pregnant, but it does not solve the problem of our own irresponsibility.

It's irresponsible to allow female dogs and cats to repeatedly go into heat without hope of relief. It's equally irresponsible to allow them to multiply. Unneutered males cannot be kept in the house because they spray. Left outside, they will wander off, get into countless fights, and impregnate countless females, until they likely die a violent death or starve. It's irresponsible to turn males out on the street in such an unnatural environement.

It's responsible to get them spayed/neutered. They then enjoy a life of comfort.

Breeders do not have such problems because they are extremely attentive to ensuring an environment for their pets whereby their selective breeding process is not tainted. They neither have a population problem nor are any of their pets sterilized so that they can run free without concern.

The only reason breeders don't have a population problem is because they sell their kittens and puppies to people who prefer expensive purebred animals, instead of adopting an animal in need. Millions of wonderful dogs and cats get euthanized each year because no one wants them, while people pay $500-$2000 for some fancy kitten or puppy.

Breeders are often part of the problem. I've been involved in promoting spay-neuter programs and our biggest opposition was from the breeders, because they were more concerned about their profits than about the animals.

[Shin'Ar]

Monica you are right in that breeders are continuing an ongoing problem. However, wherever the blame lies, we still have the problem to balance out and it seems that dogs in the homes of breeders are better maintained with regard to our of control breeding. We should consider how that can be applied in our own homes in some way.

I agree with you that the mess that unneutered animals can cause in a home is disastrous and that is why mine are neutered whether I liked it or not. And what you have said about contraception with regard to your daughter has made me ask something I have never thought of before. Why is there no pill for our animals to control unwanted offspring? the reason! because most people do not care that their animals are being violated. If their natural tendencies really mattered to us they would have designed a pill long ago.

I am not in complete disagreement with you Monica.

I realize that there is a great need to do this to our pets, and as you note, because of what we have done to the wild nature of our pets we do have an obligation to them as stewards. I would not state that we owe that same obligation to the wild kingdom though. I see way too many charities gathering massive amounts of money to assist wild species, while children are starving to death all over the world. let's take care of our own species first, and let nature care for the wild.

but as for our pets, I think that spaying and neutering may be a necessary evil as you suggest, because we have violated their natural existence by genetically manipulating them, just as it is speculated was done to us by a more advanced species, but I also point out that it is a pet owners obligation to keep their pets in a controlled environment. To allow one's pets to wander and stray just because they are now unable to impregnate or become pregnant is no different that what we allow our daughters to do once we give them the pill.

We tend to solve problems by extreme methods and then go about life as though all is solved.

Unsupervised pets can be subjected to much danger and create much damage, neutered or not. There is something to be said for the way we lack obligation to create supervision and safe environment for our children, let alone our pets.

We are an extremely irresponsible species in many regards.

[Unbound]

We feel there is not such a rigid structure truly within nature, and we find this relegations of the activities of ANY species to realms of responsibility to be an amusing and peculiar practice.

[Shin'Ar]

We feel there is not such a rigid structure truly within nature, and we find this relegations of the activities of ANY species to realms of responsibility to be an amusing and peculiar practice.

True to a point AZ. Otherwise why are there so many extinctions and cataclysmic events?

We are glad to be able to amuse you.

[Monica]

let's take care of our own species first, and let nature care for the wild.

'Nature' can't take care of wild animals if humans destroy Nature.

The Amazonian rainforest is being destroyed at double the rate of all previous estimates, according to research published today in the journal Science.

Globally we are losing:
86,000 hectares (214,000) per DAY: an area equivalent to New York City
1 hectare (2.4 hectares) per SECOND: equal to two U.S. football fields
31 million hectares per YEAR: an area larger than Poland...
Distinguished scientists estimate that an average of 137 species are driven into extinction EVERY DAY, or 50,000 each YEAR.

from http://www.ecuadorexplorer.com/html/body...ction.html

because most people do not care that their animals are being violated. If their natural tendencies really mattered to us they would have designed a pill long ago.

Respectfully, I am exiting this conversation. I find this it rather amusing, in light of the conversation we just had about killing and eating animals, the ultimate violation.

[Etude in B Minor]

Catch up!
Cats and kittens
Don't get left behind

(Paul McCartney)

[Shin'Ar]

It is a disgrace that the human leaves such a horrendous footprint on this planet, and there are many things that we can improve upon vastly in that regard.

But the human cannot be held accountable as stewards of the planet anymore than any other species should be. We are as much at the mercy of nature as all species.

One cannot destroy the natural process of Divine design, but they can interfere with it and create problems within it. But nature can also be the harbinger of cataclysmic events that are way beyond the control of any would be steward.

I say this as a Druid Priest. I spend my life enchanting nature in as many ways as I can. I live according to an ancient code of caring for Mother earth. But I do so in the understanding that my obligation is no different than the stone or the tree. All is Process. Process is beyond stewardship. The human is simply not that important in the grand design to consider themselves stewards of an entire planet and the natural course of existence.

Will we now try to find homes for all the misplaced animals in the rain forest when we cannot even provide our own brothers and sisters with the basics of survival

I am in no way condoning apathy or wanton destruction, nor ignorance of options to address problems that arise, especially problems that arise as a result of our ignorance.

What I am suggesting is that when it comes to issues of natural design, such as abortion and birth control, where the human really has no idea what the actual result of their interference will be, than we should walk very softly and try to consider all of the ramifications of our decisions. And realize our limitations.

It is one thing to see the need to control the overbreeding of our pets. It is quite another to think that we can save every animal on the planet that finds itself in distress, or to attempt to control the natural process in ways that benefit us at the expense of other species. Which leads into the theme around the Meat Thread once again.

As a species of compassion we feel the desire to be compassionate in some cases. But as a species of intelligence we must also realize that the civilization we have established on this planet is not natural, and many issues and problems have arisen around this way of life that are beyond the scope of human compassion to bring under control.

I know this seems to be a far cry from the simplicity of spaying our pets, but when one considers the smaller issues in their greater contexts this is the barrier that we face. One can choose to be a Bob Barker and satisfy themselves that they have done the world justice. One can be an Alex Trebek and feel proud of those you may have saved from starvation. One can be a Ghandi or a Mother Theresa, and accomplish much more on a grander scale.

And such humanity should be applauded and appreciated. But what about the person who invented the atomic bomb, and was responsible for the thinning of the human population which is a much greater problem to Mother Earth than our puppiesé Is that person to be commended for their contribution to solving population problemsÉ do you promote genocide or some sort of population control where many lives will be brought to en end to accomplish an immediate result for the sake of the planetÉ

Let us apply our intelligence and realize that we live on a planet where there are many more issues to be dealt with and questions to be considered than the one small facet that we might have adopted. You cannot play a game of poker if only one person is really playing, nor can you play it if each player is playing with the same card.

The bigger picture is that the Earth and our place within it is part of a Grand design that is wrought with many pleasures and sorrows. Light and dark. Chaos and harmony. To think of ourselves as a species different from all others in that we alone have some obligation to be stewards of the planet, in the face of the fact that it is we as a civilization that have created such a burden to the planet, is to deny that footprint is ours.

The human is destroying this planet by their very existence on it. we are all humans. Instead of adopting one small problem from the many and trying to make it better as though you have accomplished something, while many other issues go unaddressed, try to understand how you are a part of this whole process and just live your life doing what you think is the right thing to do at any given moment, but do so with the realization that not everyone will agree with what you think to be righteous. The Nature of the universe and even the nature of our own humanity is far too complex for us to assume a position as stewards of a planet. The human is simply not that capable. The state of our civilization and the imprint is indisputable evidence of that truth.

It is heroic to stand in front of a moving tank in rebellion. is it wiseÉ

It is commendable to sacrifice your life for a cause. But then you are dead, and nature moves on, as does the nature of the human species and its affect on the planet.

Who is to say that this is not exactly the way things have been designed as some sort of lesson in this densityÉ

Who can say what happens to the life that we bring to an end as the result of an abortionÉ We cannot answer what happens after death in fact. We can only speculate. Does our ignorance not matterÉ

Who can say what affect we have when we interfere with the natural course of natural designÉ we cannot and yet we act anyway based upon what we believe to be right, out of sheer ignorance of the true results of our actions.

we see the immediate results in that more puppies are not born, and that less are havinjg to be put down. But what about the more dynamic and higher reaching questionsÉ Is it right to just dismiss them for the sake of the immediate results that please usÉ

We need to apply intelligence and wisdom to many situations and far too often we settle for immediate results instead. is that not the path that has resulted in many of these problems in the first place, where if we had though further ahead and acted differently many of these problems would not ariseÉ

Somehwre in ancient past wolves began to get close to humans and we each adopted each others company. If the human had used intelligence instead of whimsy back then we would not have this problem of pet overpopulation now.

But here it is now and what do we do with itÉ

Do we now castrate all male caninesÉ

Do we try to save the planet with our great intellecté

Why do we, after the fact of our own destructive ways, suddenly decide that we now have the capability to be stewards of this planetÉ Iam sure if the animals could understand our arrogance they would laugh at us.

we ahve obligations to Mother earth and to all living beings. we have the obligation to be one of them. we do not have the obligation to control them or make them slaves to our belief in what is right and wrong.

that should be the difference between us and the Anunnaki. I wonder why it is not!

Arrogance seems to bred into our very genetic makeup. i wonder where that comes fromé

So let`s get out there and save the planet. We will start by only eating vegetables and spaying all of our pets. Somehow we will work our way up to solving world peace, ending famine and disease, providing a home for every single human, and most importantly building that throne for the human to sit upon as king of the world.

I applaud the love and compassion of all who stand up and cry foul and desire to make the world a better place. i do what I can myself. But I do not fall into the delusion that humanity is somehow a unique entity on this planet that deserves to assume the role of steward of all. I deny my arrogance and accept our natural design along with our unnatural deisgn.

that is just the way that it is, and delusion is not a solution. Facing reality and working wisely to adapt within it is a solution.

Balance! Not control.

the fact is that humanity has been desensitized by its constant quest for immediate results, and the constant bombardment of the consequences of that quest. And until we are ready to move back into our caves, this desensitized state will overrule wisdom.

[Monica]

It is quite another to think that we can save every animal on the planet that finds itself in distress,

No, not save them from distress. Just not cause their distress, and if we do cause their distress, take responsibility for our actions.

or to attempt to control the natural process in ways that benefit us at the expense of other species.

There's nothing natural about what humans have done and are doing to the Earth and her inhabitants. It's an aberration.

many issues and problems have arisen around this way of life that are beyond the scope of human compassion to bring under control.

Right. But meat isn't one of them.

One can be a Ghandi or a Mother Theresa, and accomplish much more on a grander scale.

Or one can simply take responsibility for the animals one is directly affecting by one's choices.

The human is destroying this planet by their very existence on it.

I disagree. It's not our existence itself, but the bellicose nature of the population that resulted from what was a rather unique experiment. We can't change the whole population. But we can change ourselves.

[Shin'Ar]

Changing ourselves is the whole premise behind evolution Monica.

But as we do so there are certain aspects about our reality that we must come to terms with in order to move on. One such aspect is that we cannot expect everyone to fall into line behind us because we believe we have the only solution and the only answer.

We must place ourselves into the whole of humanity, with all of its nature both good and bad, and realize the greater truth rather than trying to make our tiny portion of it the only pure humanity.

Humanity is all of us, and that includes a very broad range of personality and character. Individually we are a fragmented illusionary identity we have created ourselves. This is not reality. And all these aspects of our emotional interaction with the All exists only within that illusion.

When we come to accept our humanity we accept that those individual emotions and personalities are not the definition of humanity, but simply the definition of what we think we are and what we might like humanity to be.

To be human is to accept humanity as it is.

realizing its mistakes, its faults, and its unnatural episodes, and most of all that all of those things pertain as much to us as individuals as it does to the whole. This does not mean that we should not strive to make humanity a better place, a better whole. But it does mean that if we define ourselves by adopting one tiny facet of human nature, and our need to change it as though all the other facets are not as much of a definition of the whole, than we are defining ourselves as less than the whole, less than human, less than the evolution of humanity, and outside of the development of the All. Which would be of course delusional.

Challenging the faults of our humanity is honorable. Building on one's character is commendable. Attempting to paint a more pleasing picture is pleasurable.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with wanting to make a difference or trying to create a better world.

But one should not delude themselves into believing that humanity is going to change because of their effort, or that everyone should think and act the same.

The delusion is in the expectation that anything which disagrees with what we choose to believe is wrong, even when we know we are right.

The reality is that no matter how right we may be, we are not the whole of humanity, nor the perfect aspect of what it should be, if it would all just think and live as we do.

When we live as a human desiring to improve upon our individual humanity, with the wisdom that our whole humanity is not under our control, then we can better understand our place within it, and better develop our character as a result of it.

Imagine if all the terrorists and activists would adopt such thinking?

[Monica]

Changing ourselves is the whole premise behind evolution Monica.

But as we do so there are certain aspects about our reality that we must come to terms with in order to move on. One such aspect is that we cannot expect everyone to fall into line behind us because we believe we have the only solution and the only answer.

We must place ourselves into the whole of humanity, with all of its nature both good and bad, and realize the greater truth rather than trying to make our tiny portion of it the only pure humanity.

Humanity is all of us, and that includes a very broad range of personality and character. Individually we are a fragmented illusionary identity we have created ourselves. This is not reality. And all these aspects of our emotional interaction with the All exists only within that illusion.

When we come to accept our humanity we accept that those individual emotions and personalities are not the definition of humanity, but simply the definition of what we think we are and what we might like humanity to be.

To be human is to accept humanity as it is.

realizing its mistakes, its faults, and its unnatural episodes, and most of all that all of those things pertain as much to us as individuals as it does to the whole. This does not mean that we should not strive to make humanity a better place, a better whole. But it does mean that if we define ourselves by adopting one tiny facet of human nature, and our need to change it as though all the other facets are not as much of a definition of the whole, than we are defining ourselves as less than the whole, less than human, less than the evolution of humanity, and outside of the development of the All. Which would be of course delusional.

Challenging the faults of our humanity is honorable. Building on one's character is commendable. Attempting to paint a more pleasing picture is pleasurable.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with wanting to make a difference or trying to create a better world.

But one should not delude themselves into believing that humanity is going to change because of their effort, or that everyone should think and act the same.

The delusion is in the expectation that anything which disagrees with what we choose to believe is wrong, even when we know we are right.

The reality is that no matter how right we may be, we are not the whole of humanity, nor the perfect aspect of what it should be, if it would all just think and live as we do.

When we live as a human desiring to improve upon our individual humanity, with the wisdom that our whole humanity is not under our control, then we can better understand our place within it, and better develop our character as a result of it.

Imagine if all the terrorists and activists would adopt such thinking?

I'm not sure what all this has to do with cats, but thanks for sharing, Shin'Ar!

[Shin'Ar]

Changing ourselves is the whole premise behind evolution Monica.

But as we do so there are certain aspects about our reality that we must come to terms with in order to move on. One such aspect is that we cannot expect everyone to fall into line behind us because we believe we have the only solution and the only answer.

We must place ourselves into the whole of humanity, with all of its nature both good and bad, and realize the greater truth rather than trying to make our tiny portion of it the only pure humanity.

Humanity is all of us, and that includes a very broad range of personality and character. Individually we are a fragmented illusionary identity we have created ourselves. This is not reality. And all these aspects of our emotional interaction with the All exists only within that illusion.

When we come to accept our humanity we accept that those individual emotions and personalities are not the definition of humanity, but simply the definition of what we think we are and what we might like humanity to be.

To be human is to accept humanity as it is.

realizing its mistakes, its faults, and its unnatural episodes, and most of all that all of those things pertain as much to us as individuals as it does to the whole. This does not mean that we should not strive to make humanity a better place, a better whole. But it does mean that if we define ourselves by adopting one tiny facet of human nature, and our need to change it as though all the other facets are not as much of a definition of the whole, than we are defining ourselves as less than the whole, less than human, less than the evolution of humanity, and outside of the development of the All. Which would be of course delusional.

Challenging the faults of our humanity is honorable. Building on one's character is commendable. Attempting to paint a more pleasing picture is pleasurable.

There is absolutely nothing wrong with wanting to make a difference or trying to create a better world.

But one should not delude themselves into believing that humanity is going to change because of their effort, or that everyone should think and act the same.

The delusion is in the expectation that anything which disagrees with what we choose to believe is wrong, even when we know we are right.

The reality is that no matter how right we may be, we are not the whole of humanity, nor the perfect aspect of what it should be, if it would all just think and live as we do.

When we live as a human desiring to improve upon our individual humanity, with the wisdom that our whole humanity is not under our control, then we can better understand our place within it, and better develop our character as a result of it.

Imagine if all the terrorists and activists would adopt such thinking?

I'm not sure what all this has to do with cats, but thanks for sharing, Shin'Ar!

My words are spoken as though I speak to All, and not directed to anyone in particular.

It doesn't matter whether we are speaking about kittens, puppies, cows or humans. The points I am trying to bring into light touch on issues regarding all of these.

From the controversy of meat eating, to the abhorrent torture of any living being, the human must realize that in attempting to address these issues that there is no one solution that will please humanity as a whole.

To attempt to solve human nature according to one aspect of human thought process, is simply denying one's human nature.

This truth is applied with regard to cats or people. And there is no 'common' sense to be applied because there is no common ground with regard to humanity. There is simply too many different lifestyles involved.

[Monica]

there is no 'common' sense to be applied because there is no common ground with regard to humanity. There is simply too many different lifestyles involved.

Very true. However, it would seem that students of a philosophy that teaches the importance of love and compassion, might be able to find some common ground on that.

It would seem.

[Shin'Ar]

there is no 'common' sense to be applied because there is no common ground with regard to humanity. There is simply too many different lifestyles involved.

Very true. However, it would seem that students of a philosophy that teaches the importance of love and compassion, might be able to find some common ground on that.

It would seem.

One would think, but it just isn't the case. mainly because of the fact that I point out that there are too many cultural and traditional processes involved.

There are many western philosophers of great sincerity and compassion that many Hindu philosophers would consider carnivorous hypocrites.