Vegans Must be Stopped!

[Monica]

Very scary news coming out of Austin, TX. In the Naturally Fit Supershow Bodybuilding competition (drug-tested, steroid-tested, polygraph-tested) a group of 15 vegans competed under the Plantbuilt name (facebook page) against hundreds of bodybuilders with traditional omnivorous, heavy meat, dairy, and egg based diets.

The results:

The vegans won 5 out of 7 divisions that they were in. Lots of 2nd and 3rd place finishes. They also had a top 4 finisher of a class of 20+ and finished #2 and #3 of a class of 24.

I am just flabbergasted!! What is going on in the world?? As anybody with half a brain can (and often will) tell you how much vegans are protein deficient. Seriously, anybody with half a brain will tell you that.

So, how does something like this happen? How does a group do this when you have an expert group of nutritionists (the general public) asking where vegans get their protein at levels that make you wonder if they have a quota to fill.

Here’s my theory. HEAR ME OUT, ok……..just….hear me out. Being the protein starved creatures that they are, I bet they slaughtered and ate one of the judges, so they would have enough protein to have the strength to walk on the stage. They did this in front of the other judges and threatened them with the same destiny, if they didn’t give them high scores.

If you think my theory is stupid, then FINE!!! Let’s see you come up with a better one. I won’t be sleeping tonight until I hear that all of the judges have been accounted for.

On second thought, maybe all of these bumps and lines on their bodies is just a side effect from the lack of protein. I’m going to post of some of their pictures, so you can see what a protein deficiency can do to the human body. Word of warning. These pictures are graphic.

http://vegansmustbestopped.tumblr.com/po...h2X-fCrboa

[Guardian]

Basic biochemistry. Your body and gut bacteria produce all the protein you need from fruits and vegetables.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amino_acid_synthesis

[Adonai One]

I'm gradually converting to vegetarianism and this was one of my fears--protein deficiency. Seeing through that veil, it seems this diet is simply sane.

[GentleReckoning]

Thanks for posting this. Their facebook group will be a great resource for me.

[Brittany]

Facebook lol.

[GentleReckoning]

I am prepared to sift!

[Diana]

Great site to dispel the ingrained myths. I already told the story of my raw fooder friend who was a huge (muscle-wise) WWF wrestler (and meditated over 2 hours every day).

[AnthroHeart]

I wish I could meditate for an hour each day without getting restless.

[zenmaster]

Is this a red herring?

[Monica]

Is this a red herring?

No

[zenmaster]

Is this a red herring?

No

Seems so, but with the thick low-brow sarcasm and zealotry it's hard to tell.

[Diana]

Is this a red herring?

No

Seems so, but with the thick low-brow sarcasm and zealotry it's hard to tell.

How else do you suggest getting this message across? As far as I can tell, there is criticism for vegans and vegetarians no matter what they do or how they say it.

On this "enlightened" site (B4), I have learned to walk on eggshells continually around the subject of being vegetarian, while being unreservedly subjected to pot shots from those who eat meat. No offense taken, though. I just see it as catalyst to hone my communication skills. Which is why I asked the above question.

[Bring4th_Austin]

Is this a red herring?

No

Seems so, but with the thick low-brow sarcasm and zealotry it's hard to tell.

How else do you suggest getting this message across?

Do you feel like relaying messages with the same energy you are talking about is an effective way to combat it? Doesn't matching that energy just perpetuate that kind of exchange?

[BrownEye]

Do you feel like relaying messages with the same energy you are talking about is an effective way to combat it? Doesn't matching that energy just perpetuate that kind of exchange?

I could promote snowboarding as a healthy way to experience joy and raise personal vibration. Or bike riding. Or swimming. Or any other number of healthy activities. I could promote these things more than Monica promotes healthy eating.

In all of these cases I can't imagine being called a 'zealot' or ridiculed.

Which brings me to the idea that there is a core distortion inside of those that have a negative response to the concept. When I sit and consider what the difference would be in reaction to healthy eating or healthy sports, all I can come up with is killing others. All other healthy activities do not involve killing.

Although after some serious thought I did come up with two other activities that might be ridiculed, breatharian and sungazing. Even then the response is more of a snicker than a projection of distaste towards the other self.

---

Eating healthy takes discipline. Many healthy activities involve discipline.

The discipline involved in killing is more aligned with the control of others. Don't take this as a negative projection to yourself Austin, just the way I view the world in current affairs.

[Aaron]

I could promote snowboarding as a healthy way to experience joy and raise personal vibration. Or bike riding. Or swimming. Or any other number of healthy activities. I could promote these things more than Monica promotes healthy eating.

In all of these cases I can't imagine being called a 'zealot' or ridiculed.

Which brings me to the idea that there is a core distortion inside of those that have a negative response to the concept.

It just so happens that this article which recognizes one instance of the equality of vegetarians and meatatarians is biased against vegetarians. From the name of the Facebook page, it sounds like the whole page is biased against vegetarians. I think Austin's point was that points can be made for vegetarianism without resorting to utilizing the same type of attitude that this article has, but towards meatatarians instead.

[zenmaster]

Is this a red herring?

No

Seems so, but with the thick low-brow sarcasm and zealotry it's hard to tell.

How else do you suggest getting this message across?

Being straightforward works.

---

Is this a red herring?

No

Seems so, but with the thick low-brow sarcasm and zealotry it's hard to tell.

How else do you suggest getting this message across?

Do you feel like relaying messages with the same energy you are talking about is an effective way to combat it? Doesn't matching that energy just perpetuate that kind of exchange?

Combat what? How about no combat (yay).

[Diana]

Being straightforward works.

Not from my experience. Talking about food and health, in my experience, is wrought with tensions and defenses. I hardly ever do it unless I'm really pressed. Here, it is a forum, so it would seem safe to be straightforward; but as I said, I've had to tread very carefully in order to get any info or opinions across without stirring up defenses. Then it ceases to be a straightforward exchange; it becomes a struggle of sorts.

[zenmaster]

Being straightforward works.

Not from my experience. Talking about food and health, in my experience, is wrought with tensions and defenses. I hardly ever do it unless I'm really pressed. Here, it is a forum, so it would seem safe to be straightforward; but as I said, I've had to tread very carefully in order to get any info or opinions across without stirring up defenses. Then it ceases to be a straightforward exchange; it becomes a struggle of sorts.

My advice is to "be the bigger person" and remain straightforward and factual without the silly cherry picking. Appealing to reason works too.

[xise]

Being straightforward works.

Not from my experience. Talking about food and health, in my experience, is wrought with tensions and defenses. I hardly ever do it unless I'm really pressed. Here, it is a forum, so it would seem safe to be straightforward; but as I said, I've had to tread very carefully in order to get any info or opinions across without stirring up defenses. Then it ceases to be a straightforward exchange; it becomes a struggle of sorts.

My advice is to "be the bigger person" and remain straightforward and factual without the silly cherry picking. Appealing to reason works too.

And if being the bigger person or being straightforward doesn't work, perhaps one can simply accept the matter.

Acceptance is of the moment; It is important to believe you can change the future. I would add however that free will of others is important, and while you can change other's choices and constrain their will, such infringement closes the heart. So I think a balanced yellow/green acceptance is one where (1) you accept the present in its entirety, (2) believe you can change the future while at the same time recognizing that changing the free will choices of individuals is inconsistent with an open green ray, and thus we refrain from exercising our yellow in a way inconsistent with the green ray.

At the end of the day, I want to bring about a world of peace, of love, and I believe I can help do that, but I don't want to bring it by infringing on other's peoples free will and choices. If people won't listen to what we think is the balanced way to approach something, I think we have to accept that, because to force our will upon them is to close our green while exercising yellow dominance over them.

Or something like that.

[zenmaster]

Well the radical is radical precisely due to lack of acceptance.

[Monica]

It just so happens that this article which recognizes one instance of the equality of vegetarians and meatatarians is biased against vegetarians. From the name of the Facebook page, it sounds like the whole page is biased against vegetarians.

No, actually the site is run by vegans. It's intended to be sarcastic.

But the part about the bodybuilders winning the competition is quite genuine.

[zenmaster]

Yeah it's supposed to be some kind of strange humor. An inside joke? I dunno.

[Monica]

Being straightforward works.

Ya think so? So I can start posting graphic pictures and videos of extreme violence towards animals? Complete with the wailing of the cows and the bloody entrails?

Hmmm....you might be onto something there. :idea:

[BrownEye]

I am confused as to who has to accept what.

I quit messing with religious folks after I accepted the fact that it gives meaning to their life. So, I quit jumping into their threads because I find it does not matter.

Are we supposed to accept the unique beliefs of others, or simply their directed comments ?

---

I love to pick cherries. Obviously it is best to pick the healthiest and brightest fruit. Why would it make sense to pick every cherry no matter the condition?

[Monica]

believe you can change the future while at the same time recognizing that changing the free will choices of individuals is inconsistent with an open green ray

By individuals do you mean only human individuals?

At the end of the day, I want to bring about a world of peace, of love, and I believe I can help do that, but I don't want to bring it by infringing on other's peoples free will and choices. If people won't listen to what we think is the balanced way to approach something, I think we have to accept that, because to force our will upon them is to close our green while exercising yellow dominance over them.

Do you think it is 'forcing our will upon them' if they voluntarily enter an online discussion and we simply voice our opinions?

[xise]

believe you can change the future while at the same time recognizing that changing the free will choices of individuals is inconsistent with an open green ray

By individuals do you mean only human individuals?

Now this is an interesting point. In a pure sense, the question first arises to me as to what we do when humans are say eating/killing other humans, and the dying humans either:
(1) ask for our help
(2) do not ask for our help but clearly wish not to be eaten

That in and of itself is interesting. Then we can add the layer upon of it 3D M/B/S eating 2D entities, and these 2D entities are not asking for our help but clearly do not wish to be eaten.

I think there are some layers to your point, and I don't know what I would say, especially in terms of animals being eaten - does their free will count the same as 3d free will? I do not know.

At the end of the day, I want to bring about a world of peace, of love, and I believe I can help do that, but I don't want to bring it by infringing on other's peoples free will and choices. If people won't listen to what we think is the balanced way to approach something, I think we have to accept that, because to force our will upon them is to close our green while exercising yellow dominance over them.

Do you think it is 'forcing our will upon them' if they voluntarily enter an online discussion and we simply voice our opinions?

It turns on the type of discussion. You can have a yellow-based discussion, or a green-based one. I was being general in my comments.

p.s. Monica you know I'm Veg (18 months thus far, lifetime total of 8 years) looking to go Vegan right???

[Monica]

Now this is an interesting point. In a pure sense, the question first arises to me as to what we do when humans are say eating/killing other humans, and the dying humans either:
(1) ask for our help
(2) do not ask for our help but clearly wish not to be eaten

I'd say help them.

That in and of itself is interesting. Then we can add the layer upon of it 3D M/B/S eating 2D entities, and these 2D entities are not asking for our help but clearly do not wish to be eaten.

They do, actually. They ask by their screams and their wailing (unless their vocal cords have been cut, as in the case of laboratory animals...makes it more convenient for the researchers to not have to deal with their cries of pain.) Most people just aren't listening.

I think there are some layers to your point, and I don't know what I would say, especially in terms of animals being eaten - does their free will count the same as 3d free will? I do not know.

Why wouldn't it? If they are conscious enough to have will at all, then why wouldn't we want to respect it?

It turns on the type of discussion. You can have a yellow-based discussion, or a green-based one. I am being general in my comments.

Agreed. And yes, me too. I try to avoid any comments directed at anyone personally.

p.s. Monica you know I'm Veg (18 months thus far, lifetime total of 8 years) looking to go Vegan right???

Ah, I didn't know that! Cool!

I haven't been on the forum much lately.

[xise]

Now this is an interesting point. In a pure sense, the question first arises to me as to what we do when humans are say eating/killing other humans, and the dying humans either:
(1) ask for our help
(2) do not ask for our help but clearly wish not to be eaten

I'd say help them.

I agree with helping them, but how far does one go. From relatively non-infringing actions such as discussing the issue, to freeing animals that 3D entities do not know exist and have not claimed ownership of yet, to more infringing actions raiding an abusive ranch and setting the animals free, or to raiding the ranch and killing the abusive ranchers. These are just examples - the question isn't the answer to the examples, the question is what is the standard by which we determine how far to go?

Service to others is about help in a physical sense, but it's also more than that - else why would Ra tread so carefully in this density when he could be directly helping - it could be some weird esoteric undiscovered rule - or it could be the Law of Confusion or Free Will, which implies there is something important in the analysis of help as to preserving free will. Also important in all of this is one's vibration and resulting radiation of light.

I don't claim to have the answers, but I do find this subject fascinating. I usually think of it in terms of how far would I go to protect my family in various scenarios where they are facing different sorts of threats, and where they have different levels of responsibility with regard to those threats. Definitely an interesting subject!

[Monica]

I agree with helping them, but how far does one go. From relatively non-infringing actions such as discussing the issue, to freeing animals that 3D entities do not know exist and have not claimed ownership of yet, to more infringing actions raiding an abusive ranch and setting the animals free, or to raiding the ranch and killing the abusive ranchers. These are just examples - the question isn't the answer to the examples, the question is what is the standard by which we determine how far to go?

The simplest way to help the animals is to simply stop eating them, and do what we can to raise awareness so that others, too, will stop eating them. If no one bought the meat, there wouldn't be a meat industry. Everything else is moot.


  Dead Thing.jpg (Size: 51.66 KB / Downloads: 10)

[Aloysius]

Sorry I'm late guys just got back from KFC, what did I miss?
Oh...