Why I am not a vegan

[Diana]

Cool, another slew of your own opinions.

No need to be so sarcastic. What's wrong with opinions here?

I never said Ra favors the eating of meat, I said they do not condemn it as STS.

Does Ra, or any other being, have to tell us every single detail of what or what not to do? Sounds like dogma to me.

Whatever Ra, or Q'uo, or any other channeled entity says, I will do my own thinking.

Witness the first bolded words below:

Ra: I am Ra. Firstly, we underline and emphasize that this information is not to be understood literally but as a link or psychological nudge for the body and the mind and spirit. Thus it is the care and respect for the self that is the true thing of importance. In this light we may iterate the basic information given for this instrument’s diet. The vegetables, the fruits, the grains, and to the extent necessary for the individual metabolism, the animal products. These are those substances showing respect for the self.

And this:

Thus it is the care and respect for the self that is the true thing of importance.

I would add that when considering this statement, we don't know from where it is derived. Perhaps Carla's health was so bad she needed to focus only on her physical being. From this perspective, only one person's physical health was the issue, and not the more inclusive issue of what is good for the ALL (aside from the idea that what is good for one adds to the good of all; but there are more inclusive ways to participate in the good of the ALL rather than just helping one's self), and the complex considerations thereof.

I also don't agree that anyone needs animal products. But I am not as rigid as you say. In fact, I'm not rigid at all. I am open and not closed. However, if I have opinions, I don't just waver like a blade of grass in the wind. My opinions are based on extensive consideration and research, yet I don't make a dogma of any of it.

I have no "beliefs." But I do use so-called facts in my considerations. These facts are based on observation and are empirical, such as how plants propagate.

---

One more thing, Unbound. You seem to be an adept at certain things, or at least very learned. Bear with me here as I try to articulate my question.

The idea of transmutation is intriguing. I like it as it coincides with what I conjecture an artist's potential is: someone who has powers of visualization, who can do the visualizing for those without such gifts. So, in the case of an artist, why just paint what is, or write about what is? Why not gift the world with what could be, to help others see potentials? To assist in the transmutation of energies toward the evolution you envision.

Within this context, how does it work in the context of animal suffering? Wouldn't that be infringing on the will of others to transmute their experience? For instance, a cow suffers and is slaughtered, you eat the cow, you transmute the energy of the suffering and the cruelty that created it, and lift it to that of love. Isn't that controlling that energy consciously?

It seems a better approach to create this transmutation from the standpoint of letting it evolve naturally by not participating in it at all, and sending the energy of love out to all as a matter of course. It seems to me it would also require so much less energy to accomplish. And it wouldn't be infringing upon any free will—even the free will to create fear and suffering as an STS being is said to do.

What are your thoughts on this? I'm very interested in getting another perspective. That is, if I have made myself clear at all, which is dubious considering the subject matter.