In regards to eating meat

[BrownEye]

She has a one-in-three chance of her udders secreting pus and painfully swelling with mastitis, and the antibiotics forced up her udders don't have much success in controlling the disease.

I saw that stuff in a documentary.

I also found something gross when milk sat in a fridge that lost power for a day. The organic milk was still fine. The regular milk had turned into two layers. The upper layer was a yellow "pus" looking stuff, and the lower layer was white and looked like milk.

---

Incidentally, has any activism ever been shown to actually help promote their cause in the collective? By this I mean getting actual results in what the cause is about.

Absolutely!! Civil rights, women's rights, end to slavery...gosh most of the advances in human society were birthed in activism.

Analog to evolution.

[Oldern]

Monica, are you familiar with Law of Attraction?

Oh yes. And it's displayed ever so clearly in the statistics showing increased disease rates directly corresponding to meat consumption.

Eating death attracts death.

And this is when I make my quit.
Thanks for the catalysts.

[Monica]

And this is when I make my quit.
Thanks for the catalysts.

As you wish.

To offer clarification: I don't completely subscribe to the law of attraction, for it doesn't take into consideration pre-incarnational programming and simple catalyst programmed by the Higher Self.

Furthermore, we can override the law of attraction by our actions. ie., regardless of how many affirmations one does about being impervious to snakebite, it might be asking too much to knowingly jump into a pit of vipers and then dare them not to bite.

Likewise, a person could do affirmations all day long about 'compassion to animals' but if they're still eating animals, that pretty much negates the affirmations.

In short, yes I believe in the law of attraction, to a point. But I also believe in Choice and Action.

[βαθμιαίος]

we'd be spending the rest of this discussion brainstorming ways to all work together to decrease animal suffering.

I'm interested in that, too.

You seem to have interpreted my statement that the agricultural industry was not monolithic to mean that I support factory farms. That is not true.

It still seems to me that animal rights activists, humane farmers, and compassionate consumers could work together to improve the lot of animals.

In order for you to work with us, though, you may have to be willing to accept the reality that some people continue to eat meat.

[3DMonkey]

The point of Ra's compassion was to teach us how to achieve acceptance, IMO.

My understanding is that the reason acceptance is a core tenet of the Law of One is not to replace compassion, but to facilitate compassion.

Acceptance is a core tenet, yes. But compassion is the criteria for graduation to 4D positive.

To focus on acceptance, at the exclusion of compassion, is to miss the point of acceptance, and miss the ultimate goal.

I don't think their compassion was to push our thoughts toward the yellow ray concerns.

Trying to change society is yellow ray. Having compassion for animals, and answering their call, is green ray.

Polarity comes from acceptance. Without polarizing positive via acceptance, there is no Fourth Density Positive available in which to place the harvested entity. With acceptance, fourth density compassion is viable.

"Control is the key to negatively polarized use of catalyst. Acceptance is the key to positively polarized use of catalyst. " -Ra

"Those of us which had the gift of polarity felt deep compassion for those who seemed to dwell in darkness...." -Ra

[3DMonkey]

Incidentally, has any activism ever been shown to actually help promote their cause in the collective? By this I mean getting actual results in what the cause is about.

Absolutely!! Civil rights, women's rights, end to slavery...gosh most of the advances in human society were birthed in activism.

This is the yellow ray aspect I was using. Ra did not come for this, and it's this part of human bias that caused their efforts to fail the first time.

The movemts listed here all created more opportunity for hatred and fighting before they achieved the end. This is how 3D life works, and I accept how it is. I personally see engagement in yellow ray efforts as a step back in mentality.

And that is why I say eating meat is not bad for spirit.

[BrownEye]

"Those of us which had the gift of polarity felt deep compassion for those who seemed to dwell in darkness...." -Ra

Lets see, the key is acceptance?

But the polarity itself is compassion.

The definition of compassion is very easy to understand.

---

In short, yes I believe in the law of attraction, to a point. But I also believe in Choice and Action.

I find all laws interweave.

The Law of Confusion is part of the transcripts, and is hilarious to watch its effect.

[3DMonkey]

"Those of us which had the gift of polarity felt deep compassion for those who seemed to dwell in darkness...." -Ra

Lets see, the key is acceptance?

But the polarity itself is compassion.

The definition of compassion is very easy to understand.

It is what we DO with compassion that created the discussion about judgement, etc.

Looking at Ra's choice of what they did with compassion: Ra didnt answer the call compassionately by placing themselves between other and other's catalyst. In other words, their use of compassion wasn't to step in front of me and wave their finger at my catalyst and say 'stop it, Ra is here now and you will cease being mean to my friend'.
Ra felt compassion and went straight to the one they perceived "in need", and proceeded to explain the this is where we are and we can learn to accept our circumstances of now in order become closer to the Creator.

Compassion.

[BrownEye]

we can learn to accept our circumstances of now in order become closer to the Creator.

Compassion.

Yeah that would be compassion for yourself.

[Monica]

I'm interested in that, too.

Great!

You seem to have interpreted my statement that the agricultural industry was not monolithic to mean that I support factory farms. That is not true.

No, not at all. I didn't interpret it that way. I interpreted it as you downplaying the scope of the cruelty.

It still seems to me that animal rights activists, humane farmers, and compassionate consumers could work together to improve the lot of animals.

I agree! I would love to see that happen!

In order for you to work with us, though, you may have to be willing to accept the reality that some people continue to eat meat.

Absolutely! I have discussed this exact point extensively on this thread, but I realize now that you have missed a great deal of what I've said.

To briefly recap: If we didn't accept that other people ate meat, we wouldn't be able to exist in society. Why? Because most of our friends, co-workers, and, in most cases, loved ones eat meat. We face people eating meat every single day of our lives: every time we go to a restaurant, family gathering, grocery story, or even drive down the street and see the cars lines up at Whopper Burger.

So we have had to accept that people eat meat, even people we care deeply about. We simply wouldn't be able to coexist, much less still love those people, if we didn't accept that they eat meat!

So yes, of course can and do accept that most of the participants on this thread eat meat! And we have expressed countless times that we don't judge you for it, and still love you anyway!

That doesn't change the fact that we disagree philosophically, and will continue to disagree philosophically.

I will now bounce the question back to you: Can you (not just you personally, but anyone/everyone on this thread who might be interested in working with us to find common ground) accept us, and our views? Can you accept us without us having to give up our convictions?

For the purpose of working together, we would all need to put aside our differences, for the common goal of reducing animal suffering. In order to separate our mutual goal from the philosophical discussion, which might still be of interest to some people, I suggest that we start a new thread specifically for that purpose, in which no debating is allowed, in the same way I started the thread about vegetarian recipes.

Thank you for responding to my call for help!! I would so very much love love LOVE to work together on common ground!

[BrownEye]

It still seems to me that animal rights activists, humane farmers, and compassionate consumers could work together to improve the lot of animals.

I agree! I would love to see that happen!

I feel it is happening, just not as fast as personal expectations.

[Patrick]

I would agree with you that successfully living by 6d values in 3d is not realist. But I see no problem in trying.

I would agree if we were talking about 4D love, or even 5D wisdom. But 6D unity - the merging of the polarities so there is no longer any right and wrong - would seem to negate the purpose of 3D, which is Choice.

We're supposed to choose when in 3D.

That depends on how you interpret STO. For me STO is STA, service-to-all. The way I see it, a well balanced STO wanderer in 3d would be around 51% STO. There is no point for a 5d or 6d wanderer to repeat 4d and bring STO to nearly 100% to just latter have to balance this again with wisdom.

I already said that I believe animals (and plants for that matter) should be treated with compassion, just like humans.

But I also believe this to be a different debate than eating meat per se.

Then the crux of the matter is:

Is it possible to have compassion for animals and still kill and eat them?

or

Is it compassionate to animals to let someone else kill them, and maybe even torture them, so that we can eat them?

"Is it possible to have compassion for animals and still kill and eat them?"

I do not even kill flies or spiders at home, I just bring them outside. Because there is no need to kill them.

So I would say yes here.


"Is it compassionate to animals to let someone else kill them, and maybe even torture them, so that we can eat them?"

If those handling these animals were to ask my opinion, I would certainly tell them that I would prefer animals were treated with compassion.

Killing and eating cannot be separated, for the simple reason that the animal must be killed in order to eat it. Thus, if we are eating it, then we are at least partially responsible for its death.

And, the animal didn't want to die - that much is clear. So if we are responsible for its death, then what that means is that we overrode its free will to live, and stole its life.

"that much is clear"

You can't know that. And if so, it would also apply to plants.

I understand this. It's simply that I sincerely do not believe that eating meat is the issue here.

What is the issue then?

The way these animals are treated.

Lets assume for an instant that eating meat is an act that polarizes somewhat in the negative. Have you ever considered that all these animals are evolving much faster toward 3d because of what they go through in their short lives?

Sure.

But what sort of 3D?...

Exactly the one we live in.

Kind of like us under the influence of the Elites, where we live about 90 years and our normal lifespan should be 900 years. We are evolving much faster because of this negativity.

You are forgetting one thing though: It is the task of the STS entities to provide the negative catalyst.

It's not our task to do that. Our task is to respond to catalyst in a positive way, not reinforce it.

Then those treating animals this way, if aware, are maybe the STS entities you're talking about.

"Our task is to respond to catalyst in a positive way"

Actually, our task is to respond to catalyst.

[Monica]

Polarity comes from acceptance. Without polarizing positive via acceptance, there is no Fourth Density Positive available in which to place the harvested entity. With acceptance, fourth density compassion is viable.

You're still leaving out compassion. Acceptance is a key to compassion, but doesn't replace compassion.

[BrownEye]

"that much is clear"

You can't know that. And if so, it would also apply to plants.

If we apply mechanics to this we will find that as the plant is designed to not escape, it's design also omits the nervous system for pain reception. Intelligent design LoL!

[Patrick]

...

On 2nd thought, I guess I did expect something when I first started participating in this thread. I expected that most of the meat-eaters who are spiritually oriented just weren't aware of the atrocious conditions farm animals are subjected to, and I expected that once their eyes were opened, we'd be spending the rest of this discussion brainstorming ways to all work together to decrease animal suffering. I expected that they'd all shows concern and compassion, rather than arguing why they should still have the 'right' to continue supporting the cruelty.

Yeah, that's what I expected.

Boy was I wrong! That's what I get for having expectations!

We are reaching the outer teachings here.

Expecting other selves to behave the way you want and to believe what you believe lacks acceptance. You could achieve it with control of other selves, but that's probably not what you want.

So what options are you left with?

- Accepting this external situation.

- Changing this external situation.

You chose "Changing this external situation". They only way I am aware of to change external situations (without control) is to change the self. You already did that.

What more can you do that would not involve control?

---

Ra: I am Ra. This is incorrect. To a mind/body/spirit complex which is starving, the appropriate response is the feeding of the body. You may extrapolate from this.

On the other hand, however, you are correct in your assumption that the green ray response is not as refined as that which has been imbued with wisdom. This wisdom enables the entity to appreciate its contributions to the planetary consciousness by the quality of its being without regard to activity or behavior which expects results upon visible planes.

This is what I choose. This is what I do. This is hard to understand for people who concentrate all their efforts toward compassion.

Incidentally, has any activism ever been shown to actually help promote their cause in the collective? By this I mean getting actual results in what the cause is about.

EDIT:
I guess this answers my question.

http://www.bmartin.cc/pubs/07Anderson.html

Activism has played a major role in ending slavery, challenging dictatorships, protecting workers from exploitation, protecting the environment, promoting equality for women, opposing racism, and many other important issues. Activism can also be used for aims such as attacking minorities or promoting war.

This made me laugh pretty hard when I got home and read it.

Yeah, I wonder how it was done without using control? I'm missing something here.

---

"Control is the key to negatively polarized use of catalyst. Acceptance is the key to positively polarized use of catalyst. " -Ra

"Those of us which had the gift of polarity felt deep compassion for those who seemed to dwell in darkness...." -Ra

Lets see, the key is acceptance?

But the polarity itself is compassion.

Not at all, polarity is not compassion. Where did you get that impression ?

[3DMonkey]

we can learn to accept our circumstances of now in order become closer to the Creator.

Compassion.

Yeah that would be compassion for yourself.

Drastic misrepresentation of what I actually said.

(who does this serve?)

[Patrick]

Polarity comes from acceptance. Without polarizing positive via acceptance, there is no Fourth Density Positive available in which to place the harvested entity. With acceptance, fourth density compassion is viable.

You're still leaving out compassion. Acceptance is a key to compassion, but doesn't replace compassion.

IMHO we are again reaching the core of the argument here.

Your views of acceptance are not the same as mine. This much is clear to me.

Maybe you could explain how you see the relationships in between.

- Acceptance

- Polarity

- Compassion

---

"that much is clear"

You can't know that. And if so, it would also apply to plants.

If we apply mechanics to this we will find that as the plant is designed to not escape, it's design also omits the nervous system for pain reception. Intelligent design LoL!

I agree about this sort of pain. But I was talking about wanting not to die.

[BrownEye]

Incidentally, has any activism ever been shown to actually help promote their cause in the collective? By this I mean getting actual results in what the cause is about.

EDIT:
I guess this answers my question.

http://www.bmartin.cc/pubs/07Anderson.html

Activism has played a major role in ending slavery, challenging dictatorships, protecting workers from exploitation, protecting the environment, promoting equality for women, opposing racism, and many other important issues. Activism can also be used for aims such as attacking minorities or promoting war.

This made me laugh pretty hard when I got home and read it.

Yeah, I wonder how it was done without using control? I'm missing something here.

This made me laugh again LoL!

If greatly polarized, is there a "fear" of losing polarization? Or does the continued flow through the green ray mean it continues to work, even though you activate and use to the highest ability for the purpose of benefitting others, the other energy centers as well?

This thought moves me from mechanics to alchemy.

Work, work, work, I say!

The chakras are valves, the flow/rate/frequency/activation changes direction depending on where you keep your will. You r will is either directed inside on your self, or outside towards others.

[3DMonkey]

Polarity comes from acceptance. Without polarizing positive via acceptance, there is no Fourth Density Positive available in which to place the harvested entity. With acceptance, fourth density compassion is viable.

You're still leaving out compassion. Acceptance is a key to compassion, but doesn't replace compassion.

How have I left put compassion?

[Monica]

Polarity comes from acceptance. Without polarizing positive via acceptance, there is no Fourth Density Positive available in which to place the harvested entity. With acceptance, fourth density compassion is viable.

You're still leaving out compassion. Acceptance is a key to compassion, but doesn't replace compassion.

How have I left put compassion?

Compassion is the key to polarizing STO.

But, acceptance is the key to compassion.

So the first key is acceptance, yes, but it doesn't stop there. We must also get to the compassion part, in order to polarize STO.

[BrownEye]

Ra: I am Ra. This is incorrect. To a mind/body/spirit complex which is starving, the appropriate response is the feeding of the body. You may extrapolate from this.

On the other hand, however, you are correct in your assumption that the green ray response is not as refined as that which has been imbued with wisdom. This wisdom enables the entity to appreciate its contributions to the planetary consciousness by the quality of its being without regard to activity or behavior which expects results upon visible planes.

This is what I choose. This is what I do. This is hard to understand for people who concentrate all their efforts toward compassion.

Polarization while skipping over the heart chakra is not advised by Ra.

Definition of REFINED
3: precise, exact

Synonyms: developed, evolved, forward, high, higher, improved, progressive, advanced

What seems to be the gist of the texts is the information that we do not have a developed green ray, heart chakra, 4th chakra, 4D body.

What other rays will you work on in the hopes that #4 will somehow follow along of its own accord?

[3DMonkey]

Polarity comes from acceptance. Without polarizing positive via acceptance, there is no Fourth Density Positive available in which to place the harvested entity. With acceptance, fourth density compassion is viable.

You're still leaving out compassion. Acceptance is a key to compassion, but doesn't replace compassion.

How have I left put compassion?

Compassion is the key to polarizing STO.

But, acceptance is the key to compassion.

So the first key is acceptance, yes, but it doesn't stop there. We must also get to the compassion part, in order to polarize STO.

What do you think about what i said here In this post?

[Patrick]

Polarity comes from acceptance. Without polarizing positive via acceptance, there is no Fourth Density Positive available in which to place the harvested entity. With acceptance, fourth density compassion is viable.

You're still leaving out compassion. Acceptance is a key to compassion, but doesn't replace compassion.

How have I left put compassion?

Compassion is the key to polarizing STO.

But, acceptance is the key to compassion.

So the first key is acceptance, yes, but it doesn't stop there. We must also get to the compassion part, in order to polarize STO.

"Acceptance is the key to positively polarized use of catalyst. " -Ra

Acceptance is the key to polarizing STO.

Compassion results from polarizing STO.

[BrownEye]

What do you think about what i said here In this post?

I think with their ignorant compassion they are 7D while you are still working on 3D.

---

Compassion results from polarizing STO.

Well there you have it. In a nutshell. The polarized are activists LMAO!

[Patrick]

Ra: I am Ra. This is incorrect. To a mind/body/spirit complex which is starving, the appropriate response is the feeding of the body. You may extrapolate from this.

On the other hand, however, you are correct in your assumption that the green ray response is not as refined as that which has been imbued with wisdom. This wisdom enables the entity to appreciate its contributions to the planetary consciousness by the quality of its being without regard to activity or behavior which expects results upon visible planes.

This is what I choose. This is what I do. This is hard to understand for people who concentrate all their efforts toward compassion.

Polarization while skipping over the heart chakra is not advised by Ra.
...

I'm not skipping the heart chakra. It's balanced.

I'm not here to polarize, I am here to balance too much wisdom with compassion.

[Monica]

I do not even kill flies or spiders at home, I just bring them outside. Because there is no need to kill them.

So I would say yes here.

Medical research disagrees with you. There is no proof whatsoever that meat is necessary for anyone.

Those who desire to quit eating meat, may do so with a bit of education. It is doable.

to the extent necessary for individual metabolism

What exactly is this extent? NOT asking you this personally, but here is a general question:

Can anyone here honestly say that eating meat daily, and in the amounts commonly eaten, are truly necessary? Can all the meat-eaters here honestly say that they have exhausted all avenues of quitting meat? Because only then would I believe that it was truly necessary.

But of course, that is for them to decide. I would never presume to tell anyone whether meat is truly necessary for them or not. My point is that scientific research supports the position that it's simply not necessary.

Given Ra's words on this, how, then, is it justified as being necessary?

"Is it compassionate to animals to let someone else kill them, and maybe even torture them, so that we can eat them?"

If those handling these animals were to ask my opinion, I would certainly tell them that I would prefer animals were treated with compassion.

Well that's very nice, if but one chooses to eat the animal anyway, knowing how it was treated, then that is sharing in the responsibility.

Just as in a court of law...someone who watches a crime while doing nothing to stop it, is still held partially responsible.

"that much is clear"

You can't know that.

Valtor, I can only assume by this statement that you haven't watched the slaughterhouse videos. A being struggling furiously and wailing in pain and terror, is communicating with us. It boggles my mind that anyone could watch this and conclude that we can't know whether the animal wished to die, so I will conclude you haven't watched the videos.

If you now argue the point that they do wish to die on a soul level, then try applying that to humans and see how it works. If a human needs the catalyst of being murdered, then fine, but it's not the job of the STO entity to oblige that. That's an STS function.

And if so, it would also apply to plants.

We've already covered that, ad nauseum.

The way these animals are treated.

Is not killing someone poor treatment?

Exactly the one we live in.

Are you sure? What if they're populating a world much darker than the one we live in? Do we really want the responsibility of that?

And, even if it is just like the one we're in, why would anyone wish that upon fledgling 3D entities? Don't we want to do our part to create something better for them? This has been a most traumatic 3D sojourn. It's unusual. Most planets don't have the amount of bloodshed our planet has endured.

I want no part of perpetuating that.

Then those treating animals this way, if aware, are maybe the STS entities you're talking about.

Either that, or they're just really blocked up or ignorant.

But eating meat produced in such way - and this includes ANY visit to virtually any restaurant - is sharing in the responsibility in that STS action.

Actually, our task is to respond to catalyst.

I disagree. If we wish to polarize STO, then it does matter how we respond to catalyst. That is what determines our polarizing process.

---

I'm not skipping the heart chakra. It's balanced.

I don't believe any of us can truly know for sure the degree of our balancing, until we walk the Steps of Light.

I'm not here to polarize, I am here to balance too much wisdom with compassion.

Well if that's the case, then an opportunity to embrace greater compassion is right under your nose.

---

Compassion is the key to polarizing STO.

But, acceptance is the key to compassion.

So the first key is acceptance, yes, but it doesn't stop there. We must also get to the compassion part, in order to polarize STO.

"Acceptance is the key to positively polarized use of catalyst. " -Ra

That's what I just said. Positively polarized = compassionate.

Acceptance is the key to polarizing STO.

Yes, but it's the key because it allows compassion to occur.

Compassion results from polarizing STO.

I disagree. Compassion is what polarizes. One cannot polarize STO without compassion. Compassion is an indication that the green ray is activating. That doesn't happen by acceptance alone. And certainly not by indifference, which is often confused with acceptance.

[3DMonkey]

What do you think about what i said here In this post?

I think with their ignorant compassion they are 7D while you are still working on 3D.

---

Compassion results from polarizing STO.

Well there you have it. In a nutshell. The polarized are activists LMAO!

You equate compassion to activism. This makes me laugh. Activism is telling people what they shouldn't do.

Compassion is letting a dog out of its kennel to run around "free".

Activism is making a PUNISHABLE law that says the dog owner can never put his dog in a kennel.

See the fundamental difference?

[BrownEye]

Activism is making a PUNISHABLE law that says the dog owner can never put his dog in a kennel.

See the fundamental difference?

Fundamental. Hmm. You are equating punishment with what, confinement? Do I find the irony?

---

Oh wait, this is the equality you spoke of, in action LoL!

[Monica]

You equate compassion to activism. This makes me laugh. Activism is telling people what they shouldn't do.

It might be, in some cases. Activism can have different motivations.

As we've explained, in our case, our activism is motivated by compassion, not control as several meat-eaters keep insisting. (Which I find a bit offensive, by the way. I don't like being told what my motivation is. Only I know that. That's why I don't tell others what their motivation is.)

Compassion is letting a dog out of its kennel to run around "free".

Activism is making a PUNISHABLE law that says the dog owner can never put his dog in a kennel.

See the fundamental difference?

Let's take it a step further. Forget about running free; that's a luxury anyway. What if the dog is chained outside in 110 degree weather, without food or water, and suffering and may die soon?

And we feel compassion for that dog, but we cannot help him because he is in our neighbor's yard. So the only way to act on our compassion is to try to convince the neighbor to give his dog some food and water.

What if the neighbor refuses, and then goes outside with a baseball bat and beats the dog?

[BrownEye]

Let's take it a step further. Forget about running free; that's a luxury anyway.

This is being imposed on citizens as well. Part of a long term plan. Travel is a "privilege" and not a right. Kind of full circle workings here ha ha ha.