In regards to eating meat

[Tenet Nosce]

I really loved the idea that we have a 'spiritual father' and a 'physical mother' with Mother Earth being the nurturer, suckling her children with abundant plant life.

I loved the idea of sunlight and water being angels, who infused life-force into the life-giving foods laid out on the Mother's table. As Cayce said, life begets life. Having just read Cayce, it made sense to me that eating dead things would beget disease and death, and eating live things would beget health and life.

It made sense to me that the optimal way to eat would be in harmony with the seasons and our own locale. Eat more fruits in summer when they are ripe...store root vegetables and nuts in the fall and winter since they store well. Tropical climates have more fruits year-round because there is a higher need for high-water, cooling fruits, whereas those living in colder climates would probably do better with more 'warming' root vegetables and nuts.

I like all of this too... but I just can't bring myself to extricate these ideas from some of the other mumbo-jumbo which makes cooking food taboo. That's one of the places it crossed over the line for me.

With respect to raw food in general, I have to side with the Chinese view... from an energetic standpoint the body should have a fire in the belly. Too much cold food weakens the energetic system.

Now I understand that "raw" can supposedly mean up to 120 degrees or so... but c'mon isn't that just confusing? I don't think the average person thinks of that as "raw". Why not say "lightly cooked"?

It's curious how that same book might have felt restrictive to you, yet expansive to me. This just shows what Ra and Q'uo are referring to when they say to utilize what resonates.

Yes, I think this is what they are referring to. I also see how this can be turned on its head to reinforce a closed belief system.

Are you referring to vegetarians being vegetarians themselves, or are you referring to vegetarians trying to convince others to be vegetarians?

The convincing. Now- I do have some concern that there are individuals out there who may be genetically programmed to consume meat- but who skip right to vegetarianism. If so- could there be a negative effect because the body was not brought through the proper stages? I wouldn't be surprised.

Also I see potential for issues in family situations where not everybody has the same genes... yet whoever is "in charge" decides on what is best for the family based upon a distorted view of the situation. Not saying this is the case with your son... he wouldn't be so healthy if it were.

But there is the flip side of that, too. Actually one of my very first patients was a little boy with horrible eczema whose mother was raising as vegan. She was so convinced of the "rightness" of veganism that she was really unwilling to hear that it may not be the best choice for him. Of course, the little boy's condition never improved and eventually I stopped hearing from her. So I suppose that experience affects my bias.

But as for vegetarians being themselves- no I never try to convince them to eat meat or anything like that. But if not eating meat means consumption of mass amounts of GMO wheat, corn, and soy, then from a health standpoint I believe both they and the planet would probably be better off eating meat. I mean meat from animals not raised on GMO wheat, corn, and soy, of course.

(I know it is not an either/or thing... but how does one convey this to another who is stuck in either/or thinking?)

I'm confused by the question, because I don't consider it unattainable. My experience speaks otherwise. I've been a vegetarian for 40 of my 51 years. My 23-yo son has never had a bite of meat in his life and he's very healthy and strong.

Yes, but the facility by which yours and your son's bodies do this may not be the same for others. What I mean by "unattainable" is unattainable... without first going through the steps in between. if necessary. So I guess that is really the wrong term to use. Unavailable?

If you are correct that being a vegetarian is unattainable for a small segment of the population, that has no bearing on my interest in sharing info with those who do find it attainable. So I don't see how it could be a disservice in any way.

That's not what I meant. I meant a disservice of the self to the self from a person going cold-turkey (from anything really) when their body is not sufficiently prepared. Now if you were out there proclaiming vegetarianism as a one-size-fits-all solution or out of a spiritual mandate, then yes I think that would be a disservice.

On the contrary, I think it would be a disservice to not speak up...to both the animals and to the vast majority of the population who can benefit by transitioning to a plant-based diet, or, at the very least, decreasing their meat consumption.

Sure... and when you use the word transition then I really take no issue to that. Any other discussion from me beyond that is just more on a pragmatic level.

For example, I think an overall message about shifting to more of a sea-based diet addresses a much broader, more holistic view, of the issue. And if those researchers are right about the algae taking away meat cravings... then this will eventually and naturally lead toward less consumption of sea animals as well.

But when you speak of the "population" I wonder if you just mean Americans? Because the majority of the world is still in a state where they need to eat whatever they can in order to survive. For wide swaths of certain landlocked areas, I think the promotion of insect consumption would be a very wise move, for example. So this is why I won't get behind the idea that eating "animals" is the problem.

It is just too broad of a term for me, and I think misses the mark- which is monoculture and GMO/petroleum-based agriculture.

Earlier this year, we visited a biodynamic farm in Costa Rica. It was very interesting to see how the animals were actually part of the process of farming itself, not just the end result. The animals had a purpose beyond just being meat... although we did eat some of them. But still, they were cared for and appreciated while they lived. I mean... an animal is going to die sooner or later. :-/

I just don't see how this kind of process would incur negative karma... it actually seems to me like the way we need to go. I just didn't get any sense that what was going on there was "wrong" as I do when I see images of current farming practices here in the States. I thought it inspiring.