Why I am not a vegan

[Monica]

Again, animal abuse and eating meat are different topics.  By all means, avoid abusing animals.  Killing an animal quickly by skillful hunting is less cruel than dying slowly of starvation or by a pack of wolves tearing it apart in the wild.  

To assume one is worse 100% of the time otherwise, is naive.

Let's apply that to humans and see how that works:

Again, abuse of children and killing them are different topics.  By all means, avoid abusing children.  Killing a child quickly by skillful shooting is less cruel than dying slowly of starvation in Africa...To assume one is worse 100% of the time otherwise, is naive.

You just said that those actions aren't consonant with the Law of One. Why not? The only reason to assume that lying or killing humans isn't consonant with the Law of One, but killing younger other-selves IS consonant with the Law of One, is societal bias.

In our current society, it is deemed unacceptable to kill humans, but acceptable to kill animals. That is societal bias, and you just illustrated it.

So, my question to you was, why are lying and killing humans not consonant with the Law of One? (other than societal bias)

Because the lessons that precipitate STO 4th density, and the lessons that precipitate 3rd density are completely different.  Different beings are reaching for different vibrations.  In any STO act, for it to *BE* an STO act, the recipient has to, if even at the soul level, see the action as, predominantly, a benefit to its evolution.

Naturally, a certain behavior towards a rock, an animal, and a human being (in terms of STO polarity) will be quite different.

Killing an animal can be STO, STS, or even neutral.  I will concede that there situations where killing a human, or lying, could be STO (to protect another).

I agree about killing in self-defense or to protect another. But you still haven't answered my question:

Why is the same action (controlling and dominating an other-self to the point of using them and killing them against their will) 'naturally different' when done to a late 2D entity vs a 3D entity?

But you just did yourself. You just said that lying or killing humans wasn't consonant with the Law of One...presumably you meant the STO path. Why not? Because those actions are inherently STS?

I guess it would depend greatly on the circumstance.  It is a question of *why* you are doing something.  There are situations where killing humans or lying could be STO, hard as that may be to believe.  I apologize If I gave you a different impression.  In the examples I gave, the context of the conversation was such that I was asking if the advice given by a STO being would incorporate more positive behaviors, or if they would they simply accept that killing and lying was my custom and incorporate such behaviors into their advice for me.  My opinion is that they would try to get me to see a broader perspective, rather than allow me to just go on in my less than effective manner, as per my hypothetical custom.

What I'm getting at here is that you seem to consider a given that xyz behavior, when done to other humans, isn't congruent with the STO path, yet then say those exact same behaviors done to our younger other-selves is 'naturally different.' Why?  

Not talking about rocks here. I'm referring to higher 2D entities, who might be human in their next life, who have faces, pain receptors, nervous systems, social structures (even best friends!), complex emotions like joy, fear, and grief, intelligence, the ability to think, reason and even strategize, the ability to communicate, and the will to live.

You assume that all people are alike, and that everybody can eat the same thing and thrive.

If you think I said that, then you haven't read very many of my posts.

I don't think you can unequivocally say that, and it is judgmental to advocate that.  It is, however, a great way to look down on people who don't live the same way you do.

If you wish to discuss the topic, then please quit with the sideways jabs and insinuations.

I don't understand your logic that you think that would somehow give license to rape women.

You seem intent upon twisting my words. C'mon, you know that's NOT what I said AT ALL.

I can tell you that souls know there is a high probability something of that nature will occur in a given incarnation.  The flaw in your logic is that it doesn't make rape any more good or less negative. You still have a situation where someone is raping someone.  And it doesn't mean the victim isn't creating their own reality.  It's just a simple reality of the situation that a given victim wandered into a vibrational vicinity that was not in their best interest.  Their consciousness was tuned to fear and they attracted what they feared.  It doesn't make the rapist not a rapist, and it doesn't make the rape victim deliberately responsible, either.  

EXACTLY!!!! Finally, a glimmer of understanding!

It is exactly the same with raping and killing animals. Exactly the same.

I do find it somewhat ironic that you profess to subscribe to the create your own reality viewpoint, yet, still somehow think that animals aren't playing a role in creating their circumstances (and that human beings are solely responsible), no matter how unaware they are of their thoughts effect on their reality.

Then you have misunderstood. I never said that. Of course animals are playing a role in creating their own circumstances, just like the human rape victim.

And, just as you said "rape is still rape" and is "still negative" so too is it still negative, when done to ANY victim, whether human or animal! There is NO difference! Except that one is socially acceptable and the other isn't.

How *long* does a given animal (a human for example) have to, in virtually every culture, partake of a given food source before you accept it is natural for them to do so?  If an alien race were observing us, as anthropologists, they would automatically assume it was in our nature to thrive on animal protein.

What if the alien race likes the taste of human?