05-15-2012, 12:20 AM
Monica’s courageous attempt at voicing concern over the plight of animal and plant life that is used for the human food source has prompted me to write this in response. I know that thread was closed in consideration of the time span it had lasted and the fact that most of our opinions on the matter were already spoken over and over to the point where all that was left was already said.
I hope the moderators are gracious enough to allow me to post my thoughts on the subject given that I was under moderation at the time and could not respond. This should not be considered a reopening of the discussion, except to address specifically the points I have made. I am certain, and I do mean ‘certain’, that if the mods feel that this is enabling a furthering of the prior argument they will bring it to a sudden close.
Much has been said about whether or not the human has an obligation to feel compassion for other beings. And much has been said about individual rights.
And as we speak about concerns for animals and plants we must consider the priority of our own human fellow beings over and above all the rest. Is it any more or less abhorrent to see a human abused than an animal? Why aren’t we as concerned about our brothers and sisters as we are the animals that feed us? These are all questions that surround these considerations.
I think what we are really discussing here is not whether or not there is abuse taking place, or if certain forms of life have any right to consideration. Instead what we are discussing is choice and privilege.
It is not a matter of right and wrong, for those must be defined by appointed authority. This is not about what authority should be granted that right. This is about the choices that we make as individual life forms and how our choices affect us as a society and a species. And how we as a species affect other species around us.
So just to bring this entire discussion into context, let me use an example that will certainly leave the theme of the ‘meat thread’, but will serve to make my point about what I think is the true problem behind the debate.
Society is torn between the inalienable rights of a woman to do what she chooses with her own body, and the complete lack of rights of the unborn to be protected by a righteous and just society into which they would hope to be born.
And much debate takes place around this argument while both the unborn and their mothers are suffering greatly.
But I think the reason the issue is so unsolvable is because we are not asking the right questions or dealing with the roots of the problems. We are trimming the shoots of the pesky vine only to encourage its growth. Until the root is killed the pest will grow.
Is this really about the right of the woman to use their bodies as they choose, or is it actually about why women choose to use their bodies in ways that create this problem in the first place?
This may not be so much an obligation of society to protect the unborn, as it is a woman's obligation to acknowledge that she has the divine power to bring life into the world, and therefore has an obligation to be in control of such natural ability in a way that it is not abused without consideration of consequence.
If this divine power was that a woman could become pregnant and give birth to monstrous creatures that would viciously devour any human they could catch, you can be sure that the world would hold all women obligated to be very cautious about getting pregnant. There would be no question about her so-called ‘right’ to do what she chooses with her body, when other human life would be at risk.
Wait a minute! Human life is at risk.
I think what we are talking about here is not so much the woman’s right to do with her body what she chooses, but instead what her obligations are to her humanity as a being capable of bearing future life into this planet. Should a woman be casually careless and apathetic about such a divine ability? It’s not about right or wrong. It’s about a person choosing to do the right thing for the sake of humanity. In just the same way that the woman would say that the human male has the same obligation with regard to his choices around controlling the female of the species. In many countries around the world the woman is still seen as property and is abused and controlled simply because they do not have the power to defend themselves.
Is this not the same argument that the unborn fetus would use if it had a voice? Or even the plant or animal?
When we begin to talk about these issues according to rights and privileges, we begin to run into situations where the very defense we would use to defend our own stance, is the same one that another would use against us for the same abuse we cause to another. How can any woman cry out against the man demanding to be treated equally, and then deliberately go out and carelessly partake in promiscuous sex life becoming pregnant and casting aside life as though it was not deserving of the same equality?
When we look at it from this point of view we begin to see that the issue is not an individual one but a social one. When we consider these issues from this point of view, we do not need to argue about abortions only when raped, or in the case of gross deformity, or trying to define various circumstances and categories to the same problem. All other issues become secondary to the root cause of obligation to our humanity as a whole. Because the main concern lies where it should in the first place; with the individual woman. In the case of forced impregnation there is no choice for the woman, but society should have extremely severe penalties for men who cause this. The way that justice deals with this today is a joke. And if society teaches its women to be more considerate of their bodies and the creative power that they have within them, we would have less cases of unwanted pregnancies to deal with.
Unfortunately, in a world where everyone wants to be able to do whatever they choose to do, without having to face any consequences or be judged for their decisions, society ends up with a world of selfish individuals who care only for pleasing themselves and fulfilling their lusts. They could care less about the grass they walk over, the life they kill in their wake, nor their own fellow humans, as long as nobody taps them on the shoulder and asks if they realize what they have done.
Ignorance is bliss my friends. We do not want anybody shining light on our selfishness. And when they do they will cry out in defiance. And when we hear about it taking place in far away places we pretend that we would never do that here. And the only time we will stand up in reaction is when something gets in our own way of what we want for ourselves.
It is sad, but this is the way that most of us are. And those who aren’t are shunned by that majority.
Should we be eating meat?
Probably not when you consider what has to be done to make that happen.
Should we be killing plants?
Should we be killing fetuses?
Should we be killing insects?
Should we be killing each other?
The real question is not “should we be…”, but rather why are we even asking this question in the first place?
The real question is why don’t we know the answer to this question naturally?
When you finally realize this, you will understand what I have been telling you all about the state of humanity being ‘unnatural’. Something is wrong, and it is not just that we cannot figure out why we are killing everything in our path.
It is more about why we are so desensitized to it.
I hope the moderators are gracious enough to allow me to post my thoughts on the subject given that I was under moderation at the time and could not respond. This should not be considered a reopening of the discussion, except to address specifically the points I have made. I am certain, and I do mean ‘certain’, that if the mods feel that this is enabling a furthering of the prior argument they will bring it to a sudden close.
Much has been said about whether or not the human has an obligation to feel compassion for other beings. And much has been said about individual rights.
And as we speak about concerns for animals and plants we must consider the priority of our own human fellow beings over and above all the rest. Is it any more or less abhorrent to see a human abused than an animal? Why aren’t we as concerned about our brothers and sisters as we are the animals that feed us? These are all questions that surround these considerations.
I think what we are really discussing here is not whether or not there is abuse taking place, or if certain forms of life have any right to consideration. Instead what we are discussing is choice and privilege.
It is not a matter of right and wrong, for those must be defined by appointed authority. This is not about what authority should be granted that right. This is about the choices that we make as individual life forms and how our choices affect us as a society and a species. And how we as a species affect other species around us.
So just to bring this entire discussion into context, let me use an example that will certainly leave the theme of the ‘meat thread’, but will serve to make my point about what I think is the true problem behind the debate.
Society is torn between the inalienable rights of a woman to do what she chooses with her own body, and the complete lack of rights of the unborn to be protected by a righteous and just society into which they would hope to be born.
And much debate takes place around this argument while both the unborn and their mothers are suffering greatly.
But I think the reason the issue is so unsolvable is because we are not asking the right questions or dealing with the roots of the problems. We are trimming the shoots of the pesky vine only to encourage its growth. Until the root is killed the pest will grow.
Is this really about the right of the woman to use their bodies as they choose, or is it actually about why women choose to use their bodies in ways that create this problem in the first place?
This may not be so much an obligation of society to protect the unborn, as it is a woman's obligation to acknowledge that she has the divine power to bring life into the world, and therefore has an obligation to be in control of such natural ability in a way that it is not abused without consideration of consequence.
If this divine power was that a woman could become pregnant and give birth to monstrous creatures that would viciously devour any human they could catch, you can be sure that the world would hold all women obligated to be very cautious about getting pregnant. There would be no question about her so-called ‘right’ to do what she chooses with her body, when other human life would be at risk.
Wait a minute! Human life is at risk.
I think what we are talking about here is not so much the woman’s right to do with her body what she chooses, but instead what her obligations are to her humanity as a being capable of bearing future life into this planet. Should a woman be casually careless and apathetic about such a divine ability? It’s not about right or wrong. It’s about a person choosing to do the right thing for the sake of humanity. In just the same way that the woman would say that the human male has the same obligation with regard to his choices around controlling the female of the species. In many countries around the world the woman is still seen as property and is abused and controlled simply because they do not have the power to defend themselves.
Is this not the same argument that the unborn fetus would use if it had a voice? Or even the plant or animal?
When we begin to talk about these issues according to rights and privileges, we begin to run into situations where the very defense we would use to defend our own stance, is the same one that another would use against us for the same abuse we cause to another. How can any woman cry out against the man demanding to be treated equally, and then deliberately go out and carelessly partake in promiscuous sex life becoming pregnant and casting aside life as though it was not deserving of the same equality?
When we look at it from this point of view we begin to see that the issue is not an individual one but a social one. When we consider these issues from this point of view, we do not need to argue about abortions only when raped, or in the case of gross deformity, or trying to define various circumstances and categories to the same problem. All other issues become secondary to the root cause of obligation to our humanity as a whole. Because the main concern lies where it should in the first place; with the individual woman. In the case of forced impregnation there is no choice for the woman, but society should have extremely severe penalties for men who cause this. The way that justice deals with this today is a joke. And if society teaches its women to be more considerate of their bodies and the creative power that they have within them, we would have less cases of unwanted pregnancies to deal with.
Unfortunately, in a world where everyone wants to be able to do whatever they choose to do, without having to face any consequences or be judged for their decisions, society ends up with a world of selfish individuals who care only for pleasing themselves and fulfilling their lusts. They could care less about the grass they walk over, the life they kill in their wake, nor their own fellow humans, as long as nobody taps them on the shoulder and asks if they realize what they have done.
Ignorance is bliss my friends. We do not want anybody shining light on our selfishness. And when they do they will cry out in defiance. And when we hear about it taking place in far away places we pretend that we would never do that here. And the only time we will stand up in reaction is when something gets in our own way of what we want for ourselves.
It is sad, but this is the way that most of us are. And those who aren’t are shunned by that majority.
Should we be eating meat?
Probably not when you consider what has to be done to make that happen.
Should we be killing plants?
Should we be killing fetuses?
Should we be killing insects?
Should we be killing each other?
The real question is not “should we be…”, but rather why are we even asking this question in the first place?
The real question is why don’t we know the answer to this question naturally?
When you finally realize this, you will understand what I have been telling you all about the state of humanity being ‘unnatural’. Something is wrong, and it is not just that we cannot figure out why we are killing everything in our path.
It is more about why we are so desensitized to it.
![[+]](https://www.bring4th.org/forums/images/collapse_collapsed.png)
