In regards to eating meat

[3DMonkey]

I've already said that is an entirely separate topic. That is carrying a separate argument into a discussion about eating. The reason being that there is no end to that reasoning, which makes no one outside.

That's just it. They can't be separated. In order for me to eat your dog (as you suggested would be ok) I would first have to kill the dog.

Trying to separate eating meat from the killing of the animal, is disassociation. One cannot eat meat unless someone kills

Like I said, there is no end to that trail and one could blame me for the Kennedy assassination by going down that trail. So, I am not discussing that in this thread because it is off topic, IMO.


One person says "so what it an animal is killed". One person says "so what if a plant is killed". It is the same thing. One person says "I have compassion for the animal you killed". One person says "I have compassion for the plant you killed". Both are the same thing. One should not be more important than the other. Each person should be shown compassion for EACH statement. This compassion is what will transform a thought into fourth density.