In regards to eating meat

[3DMonkey]

I can only hope one day, one of you will have an "aha" and realize my point of view. Not agree with it, just kinda "see" it for a few seconds.

How would you tell the difference between someone realizing your point of view and disagreeing, and someone not realizing your point of view?

LOL, it's neither here nor there, now is it? I'm not seeking it, but I like to imagine we have already shared that moment. Even if it does happen to be in the future.

---

levels are for hierarchies

Are you saying you missed all of that in the transcripts?

Missed the other parts of the message, did ya?

No. Your other message applies to capitalism which happens to be what eliminates barter. A fat slob can get paid eating chips on a couch because i pay taxes. Equality is how the animal kingdom works, eliminating the weak.

Missed again.

[Monica]

I'm not seeking it, but I like to imagine we have already shared that moment. Even if it does happen to be in the future.

Wow, Monkey, you just made my day!

[Diana]

Eating meat and thinking about an animal being killed are not the same thing, and they need not be joined.

This is exactly why people can go to the grocery store and buy a dyed piece of meat in a small package and not make the connection to the animal who died. There is a DISCONNECT.

In the same way, people can buy cheap plastic toys from China and not make the connection to sweat shops.

In the same way, Americans can be "patriotic" and cheer for our soldiers killing Iraqis or other foreign people (including civilians and children) and not make the connection that they are people too, with their own lives, feelings, families, and fears about us.

[3DMonkey]

Eating meat and thinking about an animal being killed are not the same thing, and they need not be joined.

This is exactly why people can go to the grocery store and buy a dyed piece of meat in a small package and not make the connection to the animal who died. There is a DISCONNECT.

In the same way, people can buy cheap plastic toys from China and not make the connection to sweat shops.

In the same way, Americans can be "patriotic" and cheer for our soldiers killing Iraqis or other foreign people (including civilians and children) and not make the connection that they are people too, with their own lives, feelings, families, and fears about us.

I have oPinions about this, but this is not what this thread is about, IMO.

Biting into a hot dog or anything else, vegetable or meat. That is it.

The 3 steps to Kevin Bacon game is comical to me, and I'm not here to discuss it.

[drifting pages]

Why is killing an animal wrong ? Where does that come from ? What is the principle ? Are we not all non physical and life is just a big game anyway.

Death is not wrong.

IT is like saying that moving a being from one room in a house to another is wrong. That is all death is. You let go your focus from one state to another.

[BrownEye]

IT is like saying that moving a being from one room in a house to another is wrong.

Are you pretty comfortable with a stranger coming in and removing you from your room?

[Ashim]

Why is killing an animal wrong ? Where does that come from ? What is the principle ? Are we not all non physical and life is just a big game anyway.

Death is not wrong.

IT is like saying that moving a being from one room in a house to another is wrong. That is all death is. You let go your focus from one state to another.

This is quite true. Are though the circumstances surrounding death not of more importance than the transition itself?
Reminds me of the saying "You may forget what someone said to you, you may also forget what that someone did to you, but you will never forget how they made you FEEL"

The cat, bitten to death by a dog, may have issues with this.

[Oldern]

IT is like saying that moving a being from one room in a house to another is wrong.

Are you pretty comfortable with a stranger coming in and removing you from your room?

You do know that it cannot happen unless you agree to be allowed to be removed?

[βαθμιαίος]

By the way, you said you were going to take a stab at my questions. I am still interested in your answers, if you are still interested in sharing. I think we got sidetracked. Or maybe I missed them?

I did answer them, you followed up about the first one, and then we got, as you say, sidetracked. (I might say one of us got attacked out of left field.) Like I said, I'd be happy to continue via PM if you are truly interested in my thoughts.

[norral]

just want to 2nd what diana said. its all about disconnect. lets make it all sanitary and pretty , nothing to see here, no suffering , animals are not people they are animals. yet many animals display a far greater loyalty than human beings do to one another. and they are so so trusting in many cases. they look to us with eyes of pure love. i say if any of us had to work a full day in a slaughterhouse we wouldnt eat meat again for a long long time. and its the same thing with war, pretty cool bombs dropped so accurately designed to minimize civilian casualties. what absolute crap hey. if we were on the receiving end of those bombs they wouldnt seem so pretty to us. thats why when people say proud to be an american i say what does that mean. i am thankful to be an american. i am not proud of u.s. government policies or corporate policies around the world. i am ashamed to them for the most part and totally totally against them. i mean i still havent got over what we did to vietnam destroying that country. it just didnt seem to bother a lot of people. but it still bothers me to this day very much. i guess i am some kind of a dinosaur but american agression around the world has been going on for a long long time and most of it has been unjustified and because of one thing , money and power and influence.

and i question the fundamental direction of the lives we live. do we live to work to make money to get a vacation once a year to come back to work to make money. is that why we are here. to me the focus should be on health. having a healthy enviornment a healthy diet and a healthy life style. that should be the number one priority for all people . enjoying physical mental emotional spiritual health gives us a rich life without needing riches. we would then enjoy being in each others presence and sharing our energy with each other. we would be living in a state of bliss a type of natural high

[BrownEye]

You do know that it cannot happen unless you agree to be allowed to be removed?

In that case you always know what is going to happen before it happens.

An animal does not agree to anything, they are guided to the point of 3D, and even those new to 3D are guided until they have bias and enough self awareness and experience to begin choosing for themself.

[Patrick]

I detected a difference in viewpoint that to me seems central to the discussion.

ALL choices that I make in this incarnation are based on my sincere belief in this statement: "Judgement is at the root of ALL negativity. There can be no negativity without Judgement".

Monica, if I understood you properly, you do not agree with that statement ?

[Diana]

I did answer them, you followed up about the first one, and then we got, as you say, sidetracked. (I might say one of us got attacked out of left field.) Like I said, I'd be happy to continue via PM if you are truly interested in my thoughts.

What "attack" are you referring to? I hope you are not referring to my question you misinterpreted and I apologized for, for any misunderstanding.

[βαθμιαίος]

What "attack" are you referring to? I hope you are not referring to my question you misinterpreted and I apologized for, for any misunderstanding.

Yes, that's what I'm referring to. You didn't ask a question; you made two statements about me personally, both of which I found offensive, the first of which deeply so.

[Diana]

ALL choices that I make in this incarnation are based on my sincere belief in this statement: "Judgement is at the root of ALL negativity. There can be no negativity without Judgement".

I think I understand what you are saying: that perception of things is subjective and not based on truth. But we do need judgment.

I'm not sure how humans would evolve or even function without some judgment. If we were not able to look at a situation and judge whether it is efficacious, harmful to life, harmful to the environment, productive, for the good of all, not in our best interest, etc., we would just be. Judgment can be used in a healthy way, just as guilt has a healthy manifestation that is useful, and fear can be healthy when it prompts you to run from a grizzly bear.

There is a lot of talk about just being. There is a lot of talk about the concept that all is well. These concepts, in my mind, do not mean: let the world wash over you in all of its distortions no matter what it is. If someone came into your home with intent to harm you and your family, would you just let them, just be? What would be the value in that, other than to indulge the perpetrator? In the same way, you have talked about the monetary system. You participate out of compassion for your family, yet you dislike it. The dislike is judgment. There is nothing wrong with this judgment. Actually, the possible harm in the situation is that you are in conflict with something you are doing, not that you judged the situation as untenable.

In the same way, we may look at the meat situation and judge it. Upon looking at the realities of it, we may decide (choose) to not participate, as you mentioned you would like to do regarding the monetary system.

---

What "attack" are you referring to? I hope you are not referring to my question you misinterpreted and I apologized for, for any misunderstanding.

Yes, that's what I'm referring to. You didn't ask a question; you made two statements about me personally, both of which I found offensive, the first of which deeply so.

I am sorry you feel that way. I personally think you are making more of this than need be. I have said that I did not mean it the way you thought. I have apologized for the misunderstanding. We are communicating with typed words on a screen; misinterpretations can happen; imperfect phrasing is possible.

This is what I wrote:

It sounds to me as though you think of trees, animals, etc. as things. Your words are very emotionless. Please correct me if I am wrong.

I did not accuse you, I was just trying to understand your point of view so that the discussion could continue. The second sentence should have included a "seem" instead of just stating the way I "heard" your words.

Perhaps you could find it in your heart to forgive me.

[Oldern]

You do know that it cannot happen unless you agree to be allowed to be removed?

In that case you always know what is going to happen before it happens.

An animal does not agree to anything, they are guided to the point of 3D, and even those new to 3D are guided until they have bias and enough self awareness and experience to begin choosing for themself.

You seem to partially adapt the way how you need to contractually attract everything that happens to you, because otherwise you would not say something like this. I am not going to argue with you over this, but once the 2d animal oversouls decide that they no longer need to experience what they currently do, they wont. Simple as that. But their service is a valuable one here, one that is needed for them AND for humans as well. Without all this negativity, the world would not start to wake up finally.

It is only cruel if one manages to snuck some "but but life is all there is, afterlife does not really count" belief system into this. Feel free to do so, I wont take that away from anyone. Personally, I would not hurt any animal, and start to get remorse for insects as well. But that is my choice and my choice only, nobody gets to make that decision for me. Same goes for everyone else with their choices and their feelings about those.

[βαθμιαίος]

I am sorry you feel that way. I personally think you are making more of this than need be. I have said that I did not mean it the way you thought. I have apologized for the misunderstanding. We are communicating with typed words on a screen; misinterpretations can happen; imperfect phrasing is possible.

This is what I wrote:

It sounds to me as though you think of trees, animals, etc. as things. Your words are very emotionless. Please correct me if I am wrong.

I did not accuse you, I was just trying to understand your point of view so that the discussion could continue. The second sentence should have included a "seem" instead of just stating the way I "heard" your words.

Perhaps you could find it in your heart to forgive me.

The statement that I found especially difficult was the first one: "@ βαθμιαίος: I would like to know what you would feel if you killed a human."

I have thanked you for your apology and I do forgive you; I just would rather not pursue the particular hypothetical that Monica is interested in in public, as it were.

---

Edit to add: actually, I'm not sure I need to forgive you -- you did nothing wrong as you see it, and I can see your point of view. I just found your statements deeply shocking and as such I am, as I said, leery about continuing a difficult discussion in the public arena.

[Monica]

Why is killing an animal wrong ? Where does that come from ? What is the principle ? Are we not all non physical and life is just a big game anyway.

Death is not wrong.

IT is like saying that moving a being from one room in a house to another is wrong. That is all death is. You let go your focus from one state to another.

Let's try substituting human and see how that works:

Why is killing a human wrong?

I continue to be astounded...

[Diana]

Edit to add: actually, I'm not sure I need to forgive you -- you did nothing wrong as you see it, and I can see your point of view. I just found your statements deeply shocking and as such I am, as I said, leery about continuing a difficult discussion in the public arena.

I asked you to forgive me because you were still calling my post an attack.

The sentence you are referring to is a question, not a statement. And please, why is it shocking?

I was simply trying to draw a parallel between animals and humans, all of which are other-selves. And then to ferret out what the difference is in everyone's perception. I am here to learn, too.

You are totally welcome to not participate in this thread, as all are, if you find it emotionally disturbing. Certainly, in the spirit of exploration of a subject, any subject, there may be uncomfortable parts. It is your choice. But please, try to understand before being offended.

[βαθμιαίος]

Let's try substituting human and see how that works:

Why is killing a human wrong?

I continue to be astounded...

You continue to equate third-density humans with second-density animals, while insisting on the difference between second-density plants and second-density animals.

---

I asked you to forgive me because you were still calling my post an attack.

That's how I perceive it. It came out of left field in the middle of an intense and yes, emotional discussion, and it was about me personally rather than the subject matter.

And please, why is it shocking?

You wonder what I'd feel if I killed someone. I don't even know where to start if you can't see why that's offensive.

[Monica]

once the 2d animal oversouls decide that they no longer need to experience what they currently do, they wont. Simple as that. But their service is a valuable one here, one that is needed for them AND for humans as well. Without all this negativity, the world would not start to wake up finally.

It is only cruel if one manages to snuck some "but but life is all there is, afterlife does not really count" belief system into this. Feel free to do so, I wont take that away from anyone. Personally, I would not hurt any animal, and start to get remorse for insects as well. But that is my choice and my choice only, nobody gets to make that decision for me. Same goes for everyone else with their choices and their feelings about those.

Let's substitute humans and see how that works:

once the 3D human oversouls decide that they no longer need to experience what they currently do (like murder etc), they wont. Simple as that. But their service is a valuable one here, one that is needed for them AND for humans as well. Without all this negativity, the world would not start to wake up finally.

It is only cruel if one manages to snuck some "but but life is all there is, afterlife does not really count" belief system into this. Feel free to do so, I wont take that away from anyone. Personally, I would not hurt any human... But that is my choice and my choice only, nobody gets to make that decision for me. Same goes for everyone else with their choices and their feelings about those.

I mean, why bother trying to help someone who is about to get raped or murdered? They must need that negativity, right? Death doesn't matter anyway. And the person doing the killing, that is their choice. Who am I to say they're wrong?

[Diana]

And please, why is it shocking?

You wonder what I'd feel if I killed someone. I don't even know where to start if you can't see why that's offensive.

Okay, fair enough. I was directly asking you a question because of something you said directly. I will try and keep my questions general.

Perhaps you could try and understand me. I see all things as equal. I do not think humans deserve life and fair treatment above animals. In this light, you might try to understand that I was not trying to shock or hurt you.

[Oldern]

once the 2d animal oversouls decide that they no longer need to experience what they currently do, they wont. Simple as that. But their service is a valuable one here, one that is needed for them AND for humans as well. Without all this negativity, the world would not start to wake up finally.

It is only cruel if one manages to snuck some "but but life is all there is, afterlife does not really count" belief system into this. Feel free to do so, I wont take that away from anyone. Personally, I would not hurt any animal, and start to get remorse for insects as well. But that is my choice and my choice only, nobody gets to make that decision for me. Same goes for everyone else with their choices and their feelings about those.

Let's substitute humans and see how that works:

once the 3D human oversouls decide that they no longer need to experience what they currently do (like murder etc), they wont. Simple as that. But their service is a valuable one here, one that is needed for them AND for humans as well. Without all this negativity, the world would not start to wake up finally.

It is only cruel if one manages to snuck some "but but life is all there is, afterlife does not really count" belief system into this. Feel free to do so, I wont take that away from anyone. Personally, I would not hurt any human... But that is my choice and my choice only, nobody gets to make that decision for me. Same goes for everyone else with their choices and their feelings about those.

I mean, why bother trying to help someone who is about to get raped or murdered? They must need that negativity, right? Death doesn't matter anyway. And the person doing the killing, that is their choice. Who am I to say they're wrong?

Monica, I am sorry to see you twisting this to the point where the discussion is about a totally different topic than it was originally. This is not the first time you are making this twist, and I suppose it will not be the last time.

Personally, I still believe that lightening up our world, eliminating the need to point at each other globally will naturally lead to a state of being where people need less and less red meat, then less and less light meat up to the point where there will be no need for such inhumane conditions and those still needing to eat meat will do it in a most natural way. Judgement will not lighten up anything or anyone. I do not see how this can and this should be twisted into anything else when it is not. But as you can, go on, please.

[Patrick]

ALL choices that I make in this incarnation are based on my sincere belief in this statement: "Judgement is at the root of ALL negativity. There can be no negativity without Judgement".

I think I understand what you are saying: that perception of things is subjective and not based on truth. But we do need judgment.

I'm not sure how humans would evolve or even function without some judgment. If we were not able to look at a situation and judge whether it is efficacious, harmful to life, harmful to the environment, productive, for the good of all, not in our best interest, etc., we would just be. Judgment can be used in a healthy way, just as guilt has a healthy manifestation that is useful, and fear can be healthy when it prompts you to run from a grizzly bear.

There is a lot of talk about just being. There is a lot of talk about the concept that all is well. These concepts, in my mind, do not mean: let the world wash over you in all of its distortions no matter what it is. If someone came into your home with intent to harm you and your family, would you just let them, just be? What would be the value in that, other than to indulge the perpetrator? In the same way, you have talked about the monetary system. You participate out of compassion for your family, yet you dislike it. The dislike is judgment. There is nothing wrong with this judgment. Actually, the possible harm in the situation is that you are in conflict with something you are doing, not that you judged the situation as untenable.

In the same way, we may look at the meat situation and judge it. Upon looking at the realities of it, we may decide (choose) to not participate, as you mentioned you would like to do regarding the monetary system.

Thank you Diana,

Please, allow me to expand on my views of judgment.

Judgment certainly has its place. But judgment is only useful for the self. You judge what is good and bad for you. The self decides what is "right" and what is "wrong" for the self.

Negativity is created when we try to apply our judgment to another self.


"If someone came into your home with intent to harm you and your family, would you just let them, just be?"

I am not nearly balanced enough to witness this without reacting. If I were, I would probably not be in 3d.


"What would be the value in that, other than to indulge the perpetrator?"

The value is unconditional love and acceptance of that which is.


"You participate out of compassion for your family, yet you dislike it. The dislike is judgment."

I do my best not to apply this judgment to other selves. Like I said, people seem to be perfectly fine with the concept of money and so I accept this.

I may share the judgment (opinion) I made on money with my other selves, but I will not tell them that it's "wrong" to use money. I cannot and do not want to decide what is wrong for them.

---

...Who am I to say they're wrong?

Indeed.

[Diana]

Thank you Diana,

Please, allow me to expand on my views of judgment.

You're welcome. I like to hear your viewpoints.

Judgment certainly has its place. But judgment is only useful for the self. You judge what is good and bad for you. The self decides what is "right" and what is "wrong" for the self.

Negativity is created when we try to apply our judgment to another self.

You mean when we judge what is appropriate for another human? I agree. We can give advice when solicited, spread awareness, but being attached to the outcome is where the line is crossed, for both the self and the other.

"If someone came into your home with intent to harm you and your family, would you just let them, just be?"

I am not nearly balanced enough to witness this without reacting. If I were, I would probably not be in 3d.

I hear you. I am not evolved enough for that either.

However, aren't we in 3D to make choices? If we were here to just be and witness, making choices doesn't make sense. Maybe you could help me see this better?

"What would be the value in that, other than to indulge the perpetrator?"

The value is unconditional love and acceptance of that which is.

And yet, there is still choice, rather than just witness. You may be loving and accepting the perpetrator's choices, but are you loving and accepting your loved one's choices (your hypothetical family being attacked)? Your wife (hypothetical wife) may have defended you in a past life and now it is karmically balancing for you to reciprocate. You son (hypothetical son) may have a lesson in abandonment and needs you to step in. We don't know what others' paths are.

"You participate out of compassion for your family, yet you dislike it. The dislike is judgment."

I do my best not to apply this judgment to other selves. Like I said, people seem to be perfectly fine with the concept of money and so I accept this.

I may share the judgment (opinion) I made on money with my other selves, but I will not tell them that it's "wrong" to use money. I cannot and do not want to decide what is wrong for them.

---

I understand. I agree with this.

In this thread, no one is telling others what they are doing is "wrong." It seems that way to some, but what is happening here is we are discussing the subject of eating meat and its implications. In order to discuss it, we say what we think about it. How can we talk about it without expressing our opinions?

I feel we are spreading awareness, from every perspective here. I have said more than once that my awareness has been expanded. I hope we can continue to explore what is obviously a very emotional and volatile subject (suggesting that it needs exploring and shone light upon).

[Monica]

You continue to equate third-density humans with second-density animals, while insisting on the difference between second-density plants and second-density animals.

Yes. Plants should never even have entered into this conversation, being that we have no choice about whether to eat plants.

The only reason I have mentioned plants at all, was in response to the meat-eaters saying "But you eat plants!!! Therefore it's ok for us to eat animals! Plants are like us too!"

Can you see the absurdity of someone insisting that plants are like us, while at the same time insisting that animals aren't like us?

[βαθμιαίος]

Can you see the absurdity of someone insisting that plants are like us, while at the same time insisting that animals aren't like us?

Is anyone insisting that? I think the idea is that plants are like animals.

Re: the term meat-eater -- it seems like omnivore might be more accurate. "Meat-eater" has a faintly pejorative air to it, as would "vegetable-eater."

[Monica]

I detected a difference in viewpoint that to me seems central to the discussion.

ALL choices that I make in this incarnation are based on my sincere belief in this statement: "Judgement is at the root of ALL negativity. There can be no negativity without Judgement".

Monica, if I understood you properly, you do not agree with that statement ?

No, I don't agree with it, because so many other things are left out. Like fear. Like catalyst. Like the positive aspect of judgment: discernment. Like really defining what the word means in this context. Like so many things, it would take its own thread to explore. But even that is irrelevant, because my main disagreement had to do with your application of that concept.

Even if your statement is true - that judgment is at the root of all negativity - then it still is being misapplied, in my opinion. You said, if I remember correctly, that the judgment on this thread was worse than the negativity from eating meat.

To me, that is the equivalent of saying "discussing the problem of war, murder, and other heinous crimes, while explaining why we think they are wrong and trying to find solutions to those problems, is worse than the heinous crimes themselves."

I find that completely untrue. In order to do anything about anything negative, we must first identify it as such. That is a form of judgment better called discernment, and it plays a very important role in the process of making better choices and facilitating change.

---

Monica, I am sorry to see you twisting this to the point where the discussion is about a totally different topic than it was originally. This is not the first time you are making this twist, and I suppose it will not be the last time.

I'm not twisting anything. You explained a concept. Concepts should still work, when they are applied to different situations.

You said:

once the 2d animal oversouls decide that they no longer need to experience what they currently do, they wont. Simple as that. But their service is a valuable one here, one that is needed for them AND for humans as well. Without all this negativity, the world would not start to wake up finally.

It is only cruel if one manages to snuck some "but but life is all there is, afterlife does not really count" belief system into this. Feel free to do so, I wont take that away from anyone. Personally, I would not hurt any animal, and start to get remorse for insects as well. But that is my choice and my choice only, nobody gets to make that decision for me. Same goes for everyone else with their choices and their feelings about those.

There are 4 concepts found here, in your words:

1. When an entity no longer needs to experience whatever it is they're experiencing, they will no longer experience it. <<== This should apply to humans too, right?

2. We need negativity to wake up. <<== In that case, then why bother to ever try to do anything positive at all?

3. Killing another being is only cruel if death was really death, but since death doesn't really matter, then killing isn't cruel. <<== Then this should apply to humans too. Either the concept works, or it doesn't.

4. We get to choose whatever we want, and no one should try to influence our choice. <<== Does that include hurting another? Whatever happened to "my freedom ends where another's begins"?

These are concepts. I simply substituted humans for animals, to see if the concepts still work.

They don't. Which, in my opinion, means that the concepts aren't sound to begin with. If they were sound, then we should be able to apply them in other situations and they should still work.

Personally, I still believe that lightening up our world, eliminating the need to point at each other globally

OK so we're supposed to be lightening up the world, but pointing at each other is bad, right? But knowingly contributing, and even defending, the torture of billions of animals on a daily basis, is somehow ok??

Can someone please explain that to me?

[Oldern]

Monica, are you familiar with Law of Attraction?

[Patrick]

Thank you Diana,

Please, allow me to expand on my views of judgment.

You're welcome. I like to hear your viewpoints.

Judgment certainly has its place. But judgment is only useful for the self. You judge what is good and bad for you. The self decides what is "right" and what is "wrong" for the self.

Negativity is created when we try to apply our judgment to another self.

You mean when we judge what is appropriate for another human? I agree. We can give advice when solicited, spread awareness, but being attached to the outcome is where the line is crossed, for both the self and the other.

Yes.

"If someone came into your home with intent to harm you and your family, would you just let them, just be?"

I am not nearly balanced enough to witness this without reacting. If I were, I would probably not be in 3d.

I hear you. I am not evolved enough for that either.

However, aren't we in 3D to make choices? If we were here to just be and witness, making choices doesn't make sense. Maybe you could help me see this better?

Indeed, making choices is the whole point of 3d. May I suggest that there are ultimately only 2 choices which can be made. Either to accept that which is or to try to change it. Accepting your other selves as they are or trying to change them to better fit what you believe would be best for them.

Ra stated that even subjective acceptance gives rise to greater freedom and that knowing, even subjective knowing, is not of this density. This means that even if understanding generally comes before acceptance, you can take a big shortcut and step directly to acceptance even without understanding. That is the meaning of subjective acceptance.

Like Oldern said, if we could all manage to reach this state of subjective acceptance, nearly all the issues (karma) and negativity we experience on Earth would stop.

IMHO, this is what is happening, this is the process of transitioning from 3d to 4d. It's the fastest way to remove all disharmony. Or we can wait for 4d to come and with it understanding will come and then acceptance and then harmony.

"What would be the value in that, other than to indulge the perpetrator?"

The value is unconditional love and acceptance of that which is.

And yet, there is still choice, rather than just witness. You may be loving and accepting the perpetrator's choices, but are you loving and accepting your loved one's choices (your hypothetical family being attacked)? Your wife (hypothetical wife) may have defended you in a past life and now it is karmically balancing for you to reciprocate. You son (hypothetical son) may have a lesson in abandonment and needs you to step in. We don't know what others' paths are.

Of course you have to be who you are for your experience to be useful to the One Infinite Creator.

Regarding Karma, I prefer to release it (via forgiveness) instead of balancing it in the way you described.

"You participate out of compassion for your family, yet you dislike it. The dislike is judgment."

I do my best not to apply this judgment to other selves. Like I said, people seem to be perfectly fine with the concept of money and so I accept this.

I may share the judgment (opinion) I made on money with my other selves, but I will not tell them that it's "wrong" to use money. I cannot and do not want to decide what is wrong for them.

I understand. I agree with this.

In this thread, no one is telling others what they are doing is "wrong." It seems that way to some, but what is happening here is we are discussing the subject of eating meat and its implications. In order to discuss it, we say what we think about it. How can we talk about it without expressing our opinions?

I feel we are spreading awareness, from every perspective here. I have said more than once that my awareness has been expanded. I hope we can continue to explore what is obviously a very emotional and volatile subject (suggesting that it needs exploring and shone light upon).

IMHO it all comes down to the way we express ourselves. But we cannot communicate with words without misunderstandings. 3d is of words to allow misunderstandings and so allow freewill to reign supreme. It makes us free to understand what we want to from those words. Otherwise, there would be no choice and only harmony.