+- Bring4th (https://www.bring4th.org/forums)
+-- Forum: Bring4th Studies (https://www.bring4th.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=1)
+--- Forum: Strictly Law of One Material (https://www.bring4th.org/forums/forumdisplay.php?fid=2)
+--- Thread: Session 31 - As a Gay Man, I think Ra's take on Homosexuality is idiotic (/showthread.php?tid=13128)
RE: Session 31 - As a Gay Man, I think Ra's take on Homosexuality is idiotic - Mahakali - 08-19-2016
Seth Wrote:The love and cooperation that forms the basis of all life, however, shows itself in many ways. Sexuality represents one aspect, and an important one. In larger terms, it is as natural for a man to love a man, and for a woman to love a woman, as it is to show love for the opposite sex. For that matter, it is more natural to be bisexual. Such is the "natural" nature of the species.
Is Seth from the L/L Channeling Research thing?
I've read through only a few of those, and I get the feeling that whoever was behind them was not nearly as advanced as Ra. There's some good material in there, but I didn't run into anything in the Ra Material that I felt was inaccurate, and there have been a few times when I've strongly disagreed with that site's channeling material. Not that it's all bad, but I just take it with a grain of salt; I feel like whoever wrote it did not have as complete a perspective as Ra.
I don't think that same-sex romantic or sexual attractions are terribly unusual, having experienced them myself at times, but I also don't resonate with the idea that it's something that everyone goes through. I may be wrong, though.
From what I understand, balancing energy via same-sex interaction doesn't work the same way as with heterosexual interaction, which humans evolved to use. I know that anal sex can result in the transfer of sexual energy, but not in the same way as vaginal sex, and I'm not sure about lesbian sex. So I feel like homosexuality is just something that happens as a matter of course, but not to everyone.
Just my opinion, though.
I also don't think that there's anything wrong with being biased towards a particular racial orientation when choosing a mate, or even with strictly only mating with your own kind. I'm glad that some people do this, because it can preserve bloodlines and genetic material.
Nothing wrong with interracial sex, either, but I feel like some of the forces trying to encourage lots of that are trying to breed out certain genetic information through advanced techniques.
"Erroneous" is subjective. It all depends on the type of effect you are trying to have. Homosexual orientation might be seen as erroneous by people who have a strict idea about what information they want in the collective etheric thoughtform of their society, but it seems rare that someone would discrimiate against someone for their favorite color. But both are just preferences.
RE: Session 31 - As a Gay Man, I think Ra's take on Homosexuality is idiotic - rva_jeremy - 08-19-2016
Aion Wrote:The reason for the 'impairment' that Ra associates with homosexuality is because the red-ray energy is both reproductive and part of that initial calling to be of service. Thus the 'impairment' is simply that the individual will have to find an alternative route to move those energies up the centers.
I buy a lot of what you explained in your post; seems balanced and a way of putting a sympathetic context in those of Ra's remarks. I'd just point out two things:
1. One of the reasons I said that I simply reject the way Ra framed things is because to accept it would constitute a stumbling block for me and others. It would be one thing if we could right now ask those of Ra what they "really meant". That being impossible, we have a binary choice of whether to take or leave it. Whatever else one might say about this, leaving this view of homosexuality behind is an option that nobody should rule out. Confederation sources are not authorities.
2. I just want to reiterate that the "impairment" being discussed is a function of the individual's conflict with social norms. The problem here is that people read "impairment" and think in terms of some kind of lacking or deviation from nature, from what is natural and somehow proper or ordained by the Logos or whatever. It would be upsetting to me and others if those of Ra's language of male/female archetypical polarity were turned into a kind of essentialist endorsement of certain behaviors and rejection of others. No, the catalyst here is generated by the individual running up against society and somewhat arbitrary norms, not something innate in the person's mind/body/spirit complex that is wrong or broken.
Nothing above is intended to imply that anybody said any of this about impairment outright; I just thought that some of the talk seemed to dip into arguments from nature and we should be clear what we mean by that.
RE: Session 31 - As a Gay Man, I think Ra's take on Homosexuality is idiotic - Patrick - 08-19-2016
(08-19-2016, 06:13 AM)Mahakali Wrote: Is Seth from the L/L Channeling Research thing?
Nope.
RE: Session 31 - As a Gay Man, I think Ra's take on Homosexuality is idiotic - Aion - 08-19-2016
(08-19-2016, 08:52 AM)jeremy6d Wrote:Aion Wrote:The reason for the 'impairment' that Ra associates with homosexuality is because the red-ray energy is both reproductive and part of that initial calling to be of service. Thus the 'impairment' is simply that the individual will have to find an alternative route to move those energies up the centers.
I buy a lot of what you explained in your post; seems balanced and a way of putting a sympathetic context in those of Ra's remarks. I'd just point out two things:
1. One of the reasons I said that I simply reject the way Ra framed things is because to accept it would constitute a stumbling block for me and others. It would be one thing if we could right now ask those of Ra what they "really meant". That being impossible, we have a binary choice of whether to take or leave it. Whatever else one might say about this, leaving this view of homosexuality behind is an option that nobody should rule out. Confederation sources are not authorities.
2. I just want to reiterate that the "impairment" being discussed is a function of the individual's conflict with social norms. The problem here is that people read "impairment" and think in terms of some kind of lacking or deviation from nature, from what is natural and somehow proper or ordained by the Logos or whatever. It would be upsetting to me and others if those of Ra's language of male/female archetypical polarity were turned into a kind of essentialist endorsement of certain behaviors and rejection of others. No, the catalyst here is generated by the individual running up against society and somewhat arbitrary norms, not something innate in the person's mind/body/spirit complex that is wrong or broken.
Nothing above is intended to imply that anybody said any of this about impairment outright; I just thought that some of the talk seemed to dip into arguments from nature and we should be clear what we mean by that.
For sure it is a word that can easily be triggering because it suggests concepts such as 'disability' within our societal context, but I also think that if you read the material it becomes apparent that Ra clearly doesn't grasp our societal biases directly, often using words that are not quite how we usually use them, for example their use of 'bisexual'.
That is why I specific sought to frame that word in the context I believe it came from. It appears to me that Ra has only ever been descriptive and at no point has discriminated, but it is inevitable that as people identify with his words they may apply them to themselves and take things personally. Especially for those who do feel a lot of resonance it might feel like Ra is talking to them.
So, if you look at the concept without any bias it really is just a mechanical observation.
Also, I might offer that to outright reject the words is as reactionary as to accept them blindly. People seem to break Ra in to sections, viewing his words has differing or contradictory opinions at times. I view it as a conversation so I am always trying to perceive Ra, not his words or his language but the actual heart and expression behind the words.
It is kind of like talking with someone who is not as familiar with the English language. They won't really use the proper mannerisms or terms for things, they may improvise to a degree, and I think the same is for Ra. They do not 'natively' speak English so they are like a foreigner doing their best with all the vocabulary they have (which obviously would be pretty damn impressive given Ra's vocab) bit they do not always know the correct context in which we are used to in our society.
You can see they have a strong grasp of English as language but they also frequently profess to lack words for that which they wish to communicate. So I feel often there are sometimes words they chose for very literal reasons but which have been taken out of emotional context due to projection.
I had a Slovakian friend who would say "Before 3 hours" rather than "3 hours ago", which conveys a very different meaning for me but for him it just made sense (he spoke 3 languages and English was his second).
RE: Session 31 - As a Gay Man, I think Ra's take on Homosexuality is idiotic - Aion - 08-19-2016
So, I suppose it is just another way to me that Ra challenges us to look beneath the surface of the words and to look to the heart of the matters.
I am reading The Music Lesson by Victor Wooten and he was visited by one 'Michael' who showed him many things but one was how the more you focus on something the more it will 'pop out' in reality. Think of the colour blue, suddenly you will notice everything blue. Think of red, you notice everything red. He then showed this also applied to animal tracks and sounds in music. What you focus on will bring things out and make more noticeable the things you are focused on.
Maybe the reason I see this passage somewhat differently is because of what I am looking for in it?
RE: Session 31 - As a Gay Man, I think Ra's take on Homosexuality is idiotic - Mahakali - 08-19-2016
(08-19-2016, 11:24 AM)Patrick Wrote:(08-19-2016, 06:13 AM)Mahakali Wrote: Is Seth from the L/L Channeling Research thing?
Nope.
Okay, so where do I find this material? I've only read the Ra material in full, and apparently the Ra material references the Seth material. Is this online somewhere?
RE: Session 31 - As a Gay Man, I think Ra's take on Homosexuality is idiotic - Manjushri - 08-19-2016
(08-19-2016, 02:38 PM)Mahakali Wrote:(08-19-2016, 11:24 AM)Patrick Wrote:(08-19-2016, 06:13 AM)Mahakali Wrote: Is Seth from the L/L Channeling Research thing?
Nope.
Okay, so where do I find this material? I've only read the Ra material in full, and apparently the Ra material references the Seth material. Is this online somewhere?
Seth is a channeled energy entity that an author named Jane Roberts and her husband did hundreds or thousands of sessions with in the 70's. All of the published work is easily accessible in bookstores Amazon etc.
Not at all like the Ra Material in form, but much of the substance overlaps and works very well together.
RE: Session 31 - As a Gay Man, I think Ra's take on Homosexuality is idiotic - Mahakali - 08-19-2016
(08-19-2016, 03:05 PM)Manjushri Wrote: Seth is a channeled energy entity that an author named Jane Roberts and her husband did hundreds or thousands of sessions with in the 70's. All of the published work is easily accessible in bookstores Amazon etc.
Not at all like the Ra Material in form, but much of the substance overlaps and works very well together.
Cool, thanks. Will check out.
The fact that this is available in print in bookstores makes me wary, though... Usually, books with genuine occult information (i.e., Michelle Remembers), even if it's not very specific, gets discredited and take out of print pretty quickly, and isn't available in bookstores. The Ra Material being different in that it all checks out; it's survived the test of time, unlike similar books, which have proven to be inaccurate.
RE: Session 31 - As a Gay Man, I think Ra's take on Homosexuality is idiotic - ricdaw - 08-19-2016
I would recommend starting with the book, "The Seth Material" which is a compendium, of sorts, of many of the most significant sessions of the first 500 sessions. If that proves interesting enough, then "Seth Speaks" followed by "The Nature of Personal Reality" which are complete sessions, in order.
RE: Session 31 - As a Gay Man, I think Ra's take on Homosexuality is idiotic - Mahakali - 08-19-2016
Seth Speaks is the one I decided to start with. Excellent so far, though nothing I didn't already know, yet, but encouraging... and only 25% of the way through the book.
RE: Session 31 - As a Gay Man, I think Ra's take on Homosexuality is idiotic - Chandlersdad - 08-19-2016
(08-19-2016, 02:38 PM)Mahakali Wrote:(08-19-2016, 11:24 AM)Patrick Wrote:(08-19-2016, 06:13 AM)Mahakali Wrote: Is Seth from the L/L Channeling Research thing?
Nope.
Okay, so where do I find this material? I've only read the Ra material in full, and apparently the Ra material references the Seth material. Is this online somewhere?
Good heavens. It is all over the internet. Google "Jane Roberts Seth Material." Here is one example. http://www.sethlearningcenter.org/
There are also actual humans (not artificial voices) that read some of the books on YOUTUBE, if you wish to follow that path. https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC7z-ZVov82vAM0AVR_74OCw
All the Seth books by author Jane Roberts (the channel) are available in professional book form on Amazon or eBay. Search for "Seth Jane Roberts"
Seth spoke of many things that Ra does not discuss, so this is a very valuable resource. It is also extremely historical from a NEW AGE vantage point. Jane Roberts began the channeling sessions in the early 70's until her death in 1984. Many people argue that Seth originated that bromide of the New Age "You create your own reality". In fact, he wrote an entire book about it (channeled). Unlike Ra, who only answered questions, RA dictated entire books!
In Ra terminology, people have suggested that Seth may have been a 5th Density entity, although the books also referred to a "Seth 2" who seemed much more remote from human understanding. Seth was quite earthy and seemed to have a very close affinity to 3 D humanity in terms of affection. In fact, he claimed that Jane Roberts was his 3 D last life. While I do not recall him speaking in terms of chakras (?), his words do often complement the Ra material. The focus is just much different. For example, there is only 1 abstruse comment about UFOs.
WARNING: Again, Jane Roberts (the instrument) died in 1984. Since then, various people have proclaimed that they are now channeling Seth. In my opinion, all such claims are false. Why? Seth stated clearly that he would only appear through Jane Roberts. Other people supposedly channeling Seth today bring in negativity not ever mentioned in the original material. They also turn Seth into a mealy mouthed ninny! So do not bother with anything that does not have the JANE ROBERTS authorship.
RE: Session 31 - As a Gay Man, I think Ra's take on Homosexuality is idiotic - Chandlersdad - 08-19-2016
(08-19-2016, 06:13 AM)Mahakali Wrote: [quote='Seth']
"Erroneous" is subjective. It all depends on the type of effect you are trying to have. Homosexual orientation might be seen as erroneous by people who have a strict idea about what information they want in the collective etheric thoughtform of their society, but it seems rare that someone would discrimiate against someone for their favorite color. But both are just preferences.
We are each unique, as Ra often stated. But I must disagree with the nnotion that sexual orientation is "just preferences". I knew I was gay by the time I was 8 years old. I hated the idea. I did not want to be gay. It was a huge catalyst for me to discover myself. Yes, I was gay. That was just the way it was. It was not a "preference" like preferring Snickers over Milky Way bars.
I just find it dangerous in our homophobic society to casually refer to homosexuality as a preference like prefering the color blue.
RE: Session 31 - As a Gay Man, I think Ra's take on Homosexuality is idiotic - ada - 08-19-2016
Gender does not exist once you leave the yellow ray body so why does it matter?
RE: Session 31 - As a Gay Man, I think Ra's take on Homosexuality is idiotic - Billy - 08-19-2016
(08-19-2016, 09:30 PM)Chandlersdad Wrote:(08-19-2016, 06:13 AM)Mahakali Wrote:Seth Wrote:"Erroneous" is subjective. It all depends on the type of effect you are trying to have. Homosexual orientation might be seen as erroneous by people who have a strict idea about what information they want in the collective etheric thoughtform of their society, but it seems rare that someone would discrimiate against someone for their favorite color. But both are just preferences.
We are each unique, as Ra often stated. But I must disagree with the nnotion that sexual orientation is "just preferences". I knew I was gay by the time I was 8 years old. I hated the idea. I did not want to be gay. It was a huge catalyst for me to discover myself. Yes, I was gay. That was just the way it was. It was not a "preference" like preferring Snickers over Milky Way bars.
I just find it dangerous in our homophobic society to casually refer to homosexuality as a preference like prefering the color blue.
For sure, the process by which ones comes to prefer a color is not as complex as having a preference for a sexual orientation. I don't think it at all trivializes something if you see it as 'just a preference' but instead validates it. I don't see a preference as something you just randomly decide one day for fun, but something which builds up over time after much experience. In that sense you could say that preferences are the ways in which we express our current configuration. Who knows why we have the preferences we do? There are probably so many factors that it would be close to impossible to come up with something substantial.
RE: Session 31 - As a Gay Man, I think Ra's take on Homosexuality is idiotic - Chandlersdad - 08-20-2016
(08-19-2016, 07:10 PM)Mahakali Wrote: Seth Speaks is the one I decided to start with. Excellent so far, though nothing I didn't already know, yet, but encouraging... and only 25% of the way through the book.
Bear in mind that SETH CAME FIRST! If you have read the concepts elsewhere, they originated in modern metaphysical thought with Seth. He is the grand dad of the New Age concepts that we take for granted now.
RE: Session 31 - As a Gay Man, I think Ra's take on Homosexuality is idiotic - Chandlersdad - 08-20-2016
(08-19-2016, 09:55 PM)Papercut Wrote: Gender does not exist once you leave the yellow ray body so why does it matter?
It matters because we are all living in a 3rd Density planet and we are all 3rd Density beings, or we would not be here! By your concept, why worry about starvation since it won't exist in 4th density Earth.
By the way, gender exists through at least early 6th density according to Ra. He even told us about 6th Density entities having erotic intercourse on the sun, producing light beams. You might want to reread Ra regarding the maintenance of gender through at least early 6th density.
RE: Session 31 - As a Gay Man, I think Ra's take on Homosexuality is idiotic - Chandlersdad - 08-20-2016
(08-19-2016, 10:14 PM)Billy Wrote:(08-19-2016, 09:30 PM)Chandlersdad Wrote:(08-19-2016, 06:13 AM)Mahakali Wrote:Seth Wrote:"Erroneous" is subjective. It all depends on the type of effect you are trying to have. Homosexual orientation might be seen as erroneous by people who have a strict idea about what information they want in the collective etheric thoughtform of their society, but it seems rare that someone would discrimiate against someone for their favorite color. But both are just preferences.
We are each unique, as Ra often stated. But I must disagree with the nnotion that sexual orientation is "just preferences". I knew I was gay by the time I was 8 years old. I hated the idea. I did not want to be gay. It was a huge catalyst for me to discover myself. Yes, I was gay. That was just the way it was. It was not a "preference" like preferring Snickers over Milky Way bars.
I just find it dangerous in our homophobic society to casually refer to homosexuality as a preference like prefering the color blue.
For sure, the process by which ones comes to prefer a color is not as complex as having a preference for a sexual orientation. I don't think it at all trivializes something if you see it as 'just a preference' but instead validates it. I don't see a preference as something you just randomly decide one day for fun, but something which builds up over time after much experience. In that sense you could say that preferences are the ways in which we express our current configuration. Who knows why we have the preferences we do? There are probably so many factors that it would be close to impossible to come up with something substantial.
You seem to have zero empathy for the nature of most homosexual men, which is that they realize quite young that they are sexually different from other boys and that this can cause great anguish. Perhaps you are bi-sexual (as we define it, not as Ra defines it) so that learning over a long period that you prefer men was not more than a mere preference. I am sure that teenagers are not killing themselves over being gay simply because they realized over time with experience that they had a preference for the same sex. It was their sexual orientation. No buts, no caveats, no decisions to make.
RE: Session 31 - As a Gay Man, I think Ra's take on Homosexuality is idiotic - Chandlersdad - 08-20-2016
(08-19-2016, 04:05 PM)Mahakali Wrote:(08-19-2016, 03:05 PM)Manjushri Wrote: Seth is a channeled energy entity that an author named Jane Roberts and her husband did hundreds or thousands of sessions with in the 70's. All of the published work is easily accessible in bookstores Amazon etc.
Not at all like the Ra Material in form, but much of the substance overlaps and works very well together.
Cool, thanks. Will check out.
The fact that this is available in print in bookstores makes me wary, though... Usually, books with genuine occult information (i.e., Michelle Remembers), even if it's not very specific, gets discredited and take out of print pretty quickly, and isn't available in bookstores. The Ra Material being different in that it all checks out; it's survived the test of time, unlike similar books, which have proven to be inaccurate.
The Seth material was all channeled over 40+ years ago, yet is still in print. It has stood the test of time, at least by the barometer of a human life time. I think your prejudice against published books is rather eccentric. There are classics of metaphysical information that have been repeatedly published for 100 years. The control structure of this planet does not really care what you believe in, as long as you don't take up arms to change anything that threatens their STS elite power.
RE: Session 31 - As a Gay Man, I think Ra's take on Homosexuality is idiotic - Chandlersdad - 08-20-2016
(08-15-2016, 02:20 PM)ricdaw Wrote:(08-15-2016, 10:35 AM)Manjushri Wrote: My internal homophobia comes from primarily my parents.
They found I was involved with an older man when I was a teenager. Sent him to jail. I was emancipated. On the way down the elevator in the courthouse after judge emancipated me, my dad said "Don't come to us when you are dying of AIDS"
In the fifteen years since then we have seen each other a handful of times and I maybe get and email from them once every couple of months. I have not really forgiven them for the ordeal. But it feels like the ball is in my court now. I have come to terms with the fact that I don't have to rebuild the relationship in order to progress.
Some words of sympathy for your hard path.
A quick tarot spread suggests pre-incarnative planning. You choosing parents who would not accept, they choosing to be the instruments of rejection. It is, fundamentally, two exercises in one. One, self-reliance leading to self-acceptance. Two, the "stretch goal" of accepting and forgiving your parents for the inflicted pain.
In similar readings, I also suggest a thought exercise. How has the act of rejection changed the trajectory of your life, thoughts or emotions from what they would have been had the rejection not occurred? You can compare your life to your siblings perhaps, if you have them and if they are straight. Or to straight friends from similar families. Then, would you change bodies with any of them to have their lives instead of your own?
I marvel at the bravery we souls seem to have in the Afterlife when we plan these lives of ours. It can't only be that from the Afterlife's Eternity, a lifetime seems little more than a short dream. No, I think we know how much pain a lifetime will inflict, but we come down here anyway. By the billions. Such courage!
Namaste, Manjushri, Namaste!
Keep in mind that Ra said something like 40+ percent of humans incarnating have NO control over their life scripts. They simply process through over and over again until they FINALLY decide to look beyond surface dogma and cultural assimilation and seek to find out who they truly are. Since the majority of humans are nonpolarized, I would suggest most humans have not yet begun the journey.
RE: Session 31 - As a Gay Man, I think Ra's take on Homosexuality is idiotic - Mahakali - 08-20-2016
(08-19-2016, 09:30 PM)Chandlersdad Wrote: We are each unique, as Ra often stated. But I must disagree with the nnotion that sexual orientation is "just preferences". I knew I was gay by the time I was 8 years old. I hated the idea. I did not want to be gay. It was a huge catalyst for me to discover myself. Yes, I was gay. That was just the way it was. It was not a "preference" like preferring Snickers over Milky Way bars.
I just find it dangerous in our homophobic society to casually refer to homosexuality as a preference like prefering the color blue.
(08-20-2016, 12:24 AM)Chandlersdad Wrote: You seem to have zero empathy for the nature of most homosexual men, which is that they realize quite young that they are sexually different from other boys and that this can cause great anguish. Perhaps you are bi-sexual (as we define it, not as Ra defines it) so that learning over a long period that you prefer men was not more than a mere preference. I am sure that teenagers are not killing themselves over being gay simply because they realized over time with experience that they had a preference for the same sex. It was their sexual orientation. No buts, no caveats, no decisions to make.
Yeah, it was confusing and at times, painful. Not half as painful as some of the other stuff I went through, back then. But I do understand.
I'm pretty sure that I made the argument that your preferences aren't something you choose.
The reason why nobody kills themselves over preferring blue over yellow is because no one hates them for that preference. Some people do hate others for preferring butts and penises.
I can't choose my favorite color or my favorite type of music any more than I can choose my sexual orientation. The difference is how society reacts. That's all..
I'm liking the Seth Material, btw, and I usually hate New Age crap, because crap is usually exactly what it is. But Ra and Seth both contain a wealth of practical information.
RE: Session 31 - As a Gay Man, I think Ra's take on Homosexuality is idiotic - Mahakali - 08-20-2016
(08-20-2016, 12:33 AM)Chandlersdad Wrote: The Seth material was all channeled over 40+ years ago, yet is still in print. It has stood the test of time, at least by the barometer of a human life time. I think your prejudice against published books is rather eccentric. There are classics of metaphysical information that have been repeatedly published for 100 years. The control structure of this planet does not really care what you believe in, as long as you don't take up arms to change anything that threatens their STS elite power.
That makes sense.
RE: Session 31 - As a Gay Man, I think Ra's take on Homosexuality is idiotic - Billy - 08-20-2016
(08-20-2016, 12:24 AM)Chandlersdad Wrote:(08-19-2016, 10:14 PM)Billy Wrote:(08-19-2016, 09:30 PM)Chandlersdad Wrote:(08-19-2016, 06:13 AM)Mahakali Wrote:Seth Wrote:"Erroneous" is subjective. It all depends on the type of effect you are trying to have. Homosexual orientation might be seen as erroneous by people who have a strict idea about what information they want in the collective etheric thoughtform of their society, but it seems rare that someone would discrimiate against someone for their favorite color. But both are just preferences.
We are each unique, as Ra often stated. But I must disagree with the nnotion that sexual orientation is "just preferences". I knew I was gay by the time I was 8 years old. I hated the idea. I did not want to be gay. It was a huge catalyst for me to discover myself. Yes, I was gay. That was just the way it was. It was not a "preference" like preferring Snickers over Milky Way bars.
I just find it dangerous in our homophobic society to casually refer to homosexuality as a preference like prefering the color blue.
For sure, the process by which ones comes to prefer a color is not as complex as having a preference for a sexual orientation. I don't think it at all trivializes something if you see it as 'just a preference' but instead validates it. I don't see a preference as something you just randomly decide one day for fun, but something which builds up over time after much experience. In that sense you could say that preferences are the ways in which we express our current configuration. Who knows why we have the preferences we do? There are probably so many factors that it would be close to impossible to come up with something substantial.
You seem to have zero empathy for the nature of most homosexual men, which is that they realize quite young that they are sexually different from other boys and that this can cause great anguish. Perhaps you are bi-sexual (as we define it, not as Ra defines it) so that learning over a long period that you prefer men was not more than a mere preference. I am sure that teenagers are not killing themselves over being gay simply because they realized over time with experience that they had a preference for the same sex. It was their sexual orientation. No buts, no caveats, no decisions to make.
Where did I say it was a 'mere preference'? I think maybe you have misunderstood the way in which I am using the word preference. I consider my sexual orientation a preference. I don't personally find that offensive or think it in any way diminishes it. I think that our preferences are quite heavily ingrained in us and we have little choice with them, at least that has been my experience. I'm also not dismissing the discrimination that homosexual people experience, I don't see where you got that from. Yes, many people are discriminated against for their preferences, I am in no way denying that.
RE: Session 31 - As a Gay Man, I think Ra's take on Homosexuality is idiotic - Chandlersdad - 08-20-2016
(08-20-2016, 01:26 AM)Billy Wrote:(08-20-2016, 12:24 AM)Chandlersdad Wrote:(08-19-2016, 10:14 PM)Billy Wrote:(08-19-2016, 09:30 PM)Chandlersdad Wrote:(08-19-2016, 06:13 AM)Mahakali Wrote: We are each unique, as Ra often stated. But I must disagree with the nnotion that sexual orientation is "just preferences". I knew I was gay by the time I was 8 years old. I hated the idea. I did not want to be gay. It was a huge catalyst for me to discover myself. Yes, I was gay. That was just the way it was. It was not a "preference" like preferring Snickers over Milky Way bars.
I just find it dangerous in our homophobic society to casually refer to homosexuality as a preference like prefering the color blue.
For sure, the process by which ones comes to prefer a color is not as complex as having a preference for a sexual orientation. I don't think it at all trivializes something if you see it as 'just a preference' but instead validates it. I don't see a preference as something you just randomly decide one day for fun, but something which builds up over time after much experience. In that sense you could say that preferences are the ways in which we express our current configuration. Who knows why we have the preferences we do? There are probably so many factors that it would be close to impossible to come up with something substantial.
You seem to have zero empathy for the nature of most homosexual men, which is that they realize quite young that they are sexually different from other boys and that this can cause great anguish. Perhaps you are bi-sexual (as we define it, not as Ra defines it) so that learning over a long period that you prefer men was not more than a mere preference. I am sure that teenagers are not killing themselves over being gay simply because they realized over time with experience that they had a preference for the same sex. It was their sexual orientation. No buts, no caveats, no decisions to make.
Where did I say it was a 'mere preference'? I think maybe you have misunderstood the way in which I am using the word preference. I consider my sexual orientation a preference. I don't personally find that offensive or think it in any way diminishes it. I think that our preferences are quite heavily ingrained in us and we have little choice with them, at least that has been my experience. I'm also not dismissing the discrimination that homosexual people experience, I don't see where you got that from. Yes, many people are discriminated against for their preferences, I am in no way denying that.
I am sorry that you felt attacked. I did not intend to do that. But I've been around a long time (in my 60s) and I see the subtle influence of the words used (often by our enemies) to describe homosexuality. My favorite is "a life style CHOICE". In other words, we don't have an innate sexual orientation, we have made a choice. Of course, they consider it a bad choice, like deciding to rob a bank or murder someone. I am just a stickler for words. I was a technical writer for many years. To me, I can see someone easily equating "preference" to "choice", which is a loaded word for the Christian right who must believe that gay men choose to be gay, thus making it a sin. I was just making an abstruse point. Don't worry about it. I was being picky.
RE: Session 31 - As a Gay Man, I think Ra's take on Homosexuality is idiotic - Billy - 08-20-2016
(08-20-2016, 02:34 AM)Chandlersdad Wrote: I am sorry that you felt attacked. I did not intend to do that. But I've been around a long time (in my 60s) and I see the subtle influence of the words used (often by our enemies) to describe homosexuality. My favorite is "a life style CHOICE". In other words, we don't have an innate sexual orientation, we have made a choice. Of course, they consider it a bad choice, like deciding to rob a bank or murder someone. I am just a stickler for words. I was a technical writer for many years. To me, I can see someone easily equating "preference" to "choice", which is a loaded word for the Christian right who must believe that gay men choose to be gay, thus making it a sin. I was just making an abstruse point. Don't worry about it. I was being picky.
I understand Chandlersdad. I'm sorry if I said anything hurtful. You are right though, this is not something I have much experience with. Being in my 20s, I've only ever seen people speak harsh words about homosexual people in private. I don't think I've ever witnessed someone being openly attacked, verbally or physically, for their sexual orientation. I imagine that these are things that you have seen and experienced yourself, so I can understand your position.
RE: Session 31 - As a Gay Man, I think Ra's take on Homosexuality is idiotic - ada - 08-20-2016
(08-20-2016, 12:22 AM)Chandlersdad Wrote:(08-19-2016, 09:55 PM)Papercut Wrote: Gender does not exist once you leave the yellow ray body so why does it matter?
It matters because we are all living in a 3rd Density planet and we are all 3rd Density beings, or we would not be here! By your concept, why worry about starvation since it won't exist in 4th density Earth.
By the way, gender exists through at least early 6th density according to Ra. He even told us about 6th Density entities having erotic intercourse on the sun, producing light beams. You might want to reread Ra regarding the maintenance of gender through at least early 6th density.
I meant that you are not homosexual once you are done with this incarnation. You worry too much about what others think of you, there are always those with negative thoughts and intent that do not see themselves in you. You are in a place where you are accepted and loved unconditionaly, we only care for you to see the postive side.
RE: Session 31 - As a Gay Man, I think Ra's take on Homosexuality is idiotic - Manjushri - 08-20-2016
Mahakali Wrote:I'm liking the Seth Material, btw, and I usually hate New Age crap, because crap is usually exactly what it is. But Ra and Seth both contain a wealth of practical information.
I have this self-view that Ra and Seth are my gurus in this and many other lifetimes. Very fun to study and imagine about the mythology of them as Egyptian gods with that in mind. I love them "both" like old friends. (Seth talks like one person and Ra claims to be thousands of individuals) and they resonate equally for me, but in different ways. I always turn to Law of One daily, but Seth material always comes in waves and I can only read one book a year for some reason.
In my opinion you won't find better spiritual reads than Seth and Ra - congrats on finding them.....but it's also fun to keep your mind open that not ALL other sources of the information are crap. But yeah a lot of them are
RE: Session 31 - As a Gay Man, I think Ra's take on Homosexuality is idiotic - Karen55 - 08-23-2016
(08-20-2016, 02:34 AM)Chandlersdad Wrote:(08-20-2016, 01:26 AM)Billy Wrote:(08-20-2016, 12:24 AM)Chandlersdad Wrote:(08-19-2016, 10:14 PM)Billy Wrote: For sure, the process by which ones comes to prefer a color is not as complex as having a preference for a sexual orientation. I don't think it at all trivializes something if you see it as 'just a preference' but instead validates it. I don't see a preference as something you just randomly decide one day for fun, but something which builds up over time after much experience. In that sense you could say that preferences are the ways in which we express our current configuration. Who knows why we have the preferences we do? There are probably so many factors that it would be close to impossible to come up with something substantial.
You seem to have zero empathy for the nature of most homosexual men, which is that they realize quite young that they are sexually different from other boys and that this can cause great anguish. Perhaps you are bi-sexual (as we define it, not as Ra defines it) so that learning over a long period that you prefer men was not more than a mere preference. I am sure that teenagers are not killing themselves over being gay simply because they realized over time with experience that they had a preference for the same sex. It was their sexual orientation. No buts, no caveats, no decisions to make.
Where did I say it was a 'mere preference'? I think maybe you have misunderstood the way in which I am using the word preference. I consider my sexual orientation a preference. I don't personally find that offensive or think it in any way diminishes it. I think that our preferences are quite heavily ingrained in us and we have little choice with them, at least that has been my experience. I'm also not dismissing the discrimination that homosexual people experience, I don't see where you got that from. Yes, many people are discriminated against for their preferences, I am in no way denying that.
I am sorry that you felt attacked. I did not intend to do that. But I've been around a long time (in my 60s) and I see the subtle influence of the words used (often by our enemies) to describe homosexuality. My favorite is "a life style CHOICE". In other words, we don't have an innate sexual orientation, we have made a choice. Of course, they consider it a bad choice, like deciding to rob a bank or murder someone. I am just a stickler for words. I was a technical writer for many years. To me, I can see someone easily equating "preference" to "choice", which is a loaded word for the Christian right who must believe that gay men choose to be gay, thus making it a sin. I was just making an abstruse point. Don't worry about it. I was being picky.
Hello! I'm late to the party, too, but I see others have been helping you to understand how mistakes in understanding occur. If you would like a more modern interpretation of the Law of One, I suggest you read The Aaron/Q'uo Dialogues, which is available in the L/L Research online store. Q'uo is a social memory complex that formed when Ra merged with another SMC after Don's death and Aaron is an entity who discovered Barbara Brodsky and began channelling through her. Both of those entities expound on their interpretations of the LOO and have a great time interacting with the humans present during the channelling sessions. My understanding leads me to believe we incarnate in a very specific form, gay/straight/trans, fat/thin, beautiful/ugly, rich/poor, etc., for the purpose of experiencing life in that form, either for lessening karmic debt (as I have) or to learn some lesson that we could not otherwise understand (as I hope to do). In that aspect, being gay IS a choice- one we made before incarnating! It is not a right or wrong choice, but merely a characteristic of the entity we become. I have been attracted to both genders all my life, my oldest child is the same, and my youngest child feels she is a man who was born into a woman's body. I do not judge, but only try to help people seek the lessons they desire to learn. I have also listened to Scott Mandelker a little- his take on the LOO did not resonate with me at all! I get the impression that he wants to do to Ra's teachings what Emperor Constantine did to Christ's teachings- build it up into a huge money-making and population-controlling scam! We won't let that happen, will we? I wish you Love and Light in your journey!
RE: Session 31 - As a Gay Man, I think Ra's take on Homosexuality is idiotic - AnthroHeart - 08-23-2016
I just had a gay dream, so in our dreams when we don't remember our life at all, if we're gay, it's not a choice. It just is.
RE: Session 31 - As a Gay Man, I think Ra's take on Homosexuality is idiotic - Chandlersdad - 08-23-2016
(08-23-2016, 09:33 AM)IndigoGeminiWolf Wrote: I just had a gay dream, so in our dreams when we don't remember our life at all, if we're gay, it's not a choice. It just is.The best sex I have ever experienced has been in the dream state.
RE: Session 31 - As a Gay Man, I think Ra's take on Homosexuality is idiotic - ada - 08-23-2016
(08-23-2016, 03:25 PM)Chandlersdad Wrote:(08-23-2016, 09:33 AM)IndigoGeminiWolf Wrote: I just had a gay dream, so in our dreams when we don't remember our life at all, if we're gay, it's not a choice. It just is.The best sex I have ever experienced has been in the dream state.
Touche.