(09-18-2014, 01:35 AM)Account1 Wrote: You obviously hold a great deal of passion for this subject.
Ah, maybe you are rather new here? Pleased to meet you, Account1!

(09-18-2014, 01:35 AM)Account1 Wrote:Quote:First of all, I never claimed that my own morals are 'superior.' You used those words, not me.Well you did say this
Quote:How is supporting the unnecessary torture and killing of sentient beings preferable to taking a simple, cheap supplement
That was an honest question, to which no one yet has offered a reply.
(09-18-2014, 01:35 AM)Account1 Wrote: Simultaneously demonizing those who don't share the same sentiment and displaying a sense of conviction in the purity of your own ideals.
Demonizing? Gosh, such strong language!
(09-18-2014, 01:35 AM)Account1 Wrote: You then went on to say that without morals blacks would still be slaves. I take it you don't approve of slavery,
Um...no, I don't. Does any decent person approve of slavery nowadays? I thought that was kinda basic.
(09-18-2014, 01:35 AM)Account1 Wrote: it doesn't render a positive judgement in your ethical standard, what you do and don't find acceptable, so yes it does have a great deal to do with what you approve of.
Of course I don't 'approve' of slavery, or any other cruelty. But why are you making this about me? Let's talk about the cruelty to animals vs taking a supplement. That is the topic.
(09-18-2014, 01:35 AM)Account1 Wrote: So is everything acceptable in a cosmic light? wouldn't it be rather dissonant to think that everything is acceptable and to even have morals?
That is a deeper question, and there are surely other threads that address that. Have you read the Law of One?
(09-18-2014, 01:35 AM)Account1 Wrote:Quote:However, to someone who is aspiring to polarize STO, compassionate actions are preferable to cruel actions.So it this desire to "polarize", to achieve harvest/purity/salvation that drives you to avoid cruelty? Not good for good's sake? Wouldn't that be as selfish as eating meat for pleasure and survival?
If that was the motivation, then yes, it would be selfish and in fact wouldn't even help polarization anyway, because it's for the wrong reasons.
But no, that isn't the reason. The vast majority of vegetarians and vegans have never even heard of the Law of One, so obviously that's not the reason they've decided to live more compassionately. I was a vegetarian several years before I ever read the Law of One, and I decided to go vegan when my eyes were opened to the cruelty in the dairy industry.
The reason I said that was because 1. we are on a Law of One forum, and 2. I was directly responding to something you said about moralizing. I was trying to make the point that there are ideals higher than one's own personal biases.
and 3. There is a history on this forum. Check out the other meat threads. Apparently many people don't care about ending cruelty for the sake of the animals, and interpret Ra as giving tacit approval of eating animals. I vehemently disagree with that interpretation, and was trying to simplify in terms of STS and STO.