Great danger in use of the will

[turtledude23]

That is precisely my point: Why are those particular causes singled out and labeled 'petty'?

and I on the underlying message which I interpreted as: seemingly STO causes which are actually neutral or STS; canon fodder for arguments that go nowhere.

Can you explain to me how those particular causes fit those descriptions?

Of course wanting to help the homeless or starving children is a good cause and I don't think lightning would disagree with you so clearly there must be some misunderstanding.

How is helping the homeless or starving children any more noble than wanting to see the perpetrators of an atrocious crime (911) brought to justice, or wanting to end the torture of billions of animals on a daily basis?

Why is a judgment being made about the causes that others feel passionate about?

Because people who care about homeless people or starving people are more likely to actually do something to help said people, where as people who care about 9/11 truth aren't likely to do anything but argue, tell people to "wake up", etc. And even if everyone in the world knew 9/11 was done by the Bush administration what would that accomplish? There'd still be the patriot act because there still are other terrorists out there than the one who supposedly conducted 9/11, there'd still be a war in afghanistan and iraq. And how is the message being spread now? A guy with a megaphone who believes in plenty of false things. Documentaries which, while providing facts, blame it on "the zionist conspiracy".

And fighting for vegetarianism is not a good cause because all I could interpret as fighting is trying to convince people to go veg fiercely, which would not be accepting of others, or releasing animals from farms, which would give the cause bad publicity. If fighting for the cause is calmly explaining the health, environmental, and compassion benefits when asked then I'm all for that, but I wouldn't call that a fighting for a cause any more than I'd call giving directions to someone who asks for directions fighting for a cause.

Some causes are more distorted than others in terms of how much they help you polarize to STO. Knowing what you know now, would you rather use your will power for meditating, or for telling people about 9/11? For volunteering at an animal hospital or for fur is murder protests with red paint? Now, let's say you had the same degree of will power you have now as back when you were less "centered" on your path, do you think that would have done more harm or more good? In other words if will power was Watts and potential for polarization from a given cause was a percentage, then would it have been helpful or harmful for you to invest so much energy into lets say supporting a political party. I think we can all agree that left wing parties are usually more STO than right wing parties, even if both are almost always corrupt, so by your logic supporting a left wing party whole heartedly would be a good thing just because it seems good to the person, when in reality to that the person would have to be very controlling/unaccepting of many parts of themselves and of others, thereby not polarizing much either way but causing themselves alot of emotional anguish from the self discipline.