Meat, anyone?

[anart]

Just to offer another perspective, are any of you familiar with the 'blood type diet'? I've been a vegetarian for over twenty years now. I was unaware of this 'blood type diet' when I became a vegetarian - I simply stopped eating meat because it made me feel rotten and I didn't 'like' it. Turns out I'm AB blood type, which according to the 'blood type diet' shouldn't eat meat.

I didn't stop eating meat to stop hurting animals, though I am very much an 'animal lover' and very concerned about their suffering - and I didn't do it for 'health reasons' - I did it because I didn't 'like' meat - now I know that it is likely due to my rather rare blood type.

As far as how STO and STS play into this, it is my understanding that eating - consuming other forms of life for our own pleasure/survival is STS - this cannot be STO, no matter if you are eating baby chickens or cardboard cutouts of baby chickens. It is serving self.

I also think that there are most definitely blood types that require meat in their diet to function - type O being the most obvious, and most common blood type. So, as always, the devil is in the details, and this 'place' is hell - a feeding frenzy in every sense of the phrase.

Ultimately, I hate the whole concept of having to eat to survive - it's rather a disgusting thing, but I'm a bit odd, I realize - I keep hoping to wake up one day and be photosynthetic, still hasn't happened yet, though..

 

[nf3]

As for 'We're STS, we cannot do anything about that, we need meat', i do not agree.

Well, it's not what I said. :)

My point was that I have a pretty good idea of what my body needs and what it cannot handle, thanks mostly to Laura's research and quite a bit of experimentation on my part. I also know that everyone has different nutritional needs, so I did not say "we."

Maybe the issue is not whether you eat meat or not, but why do you eat the way that you do.

Yes, exactly. Are you familiar with the blood type diet?

 

[Z...]

Well Mrs. Tigersoap,
I agree that most people eat mechanically, even worse they don't eat food and appreciate it for what it is but they eat moves, tv commercials, newspapers, books. They dont even acknowledge they are feeding themselves while doing all these things over meals. For some meals are nuisance and waste of time that just has to be done with. Sometimes I am like that too.
But I tried more then once to break the unconscious patterns in my diet. My conclusion is that sometimes unconscious patterns are based on the true knowledge of your body about the things it needs. I will try to explain.
I gave my best try at vegetarianism, lasted almost tree weeks. But I went through hell.
Not just that I had 0 energy for my usual physical activities I also literally started dreaming about meet, craving raw flesh (even before I was quite fond of raw or undercooked meat but never really drolled over raw meat in the butcher shop) . Since then I consciously eat meat, I cherish it and give it due respect and I am pretty much ok with the notion that I am an omnivore.
Btw I am O blood type. While I don't buy the whole blood type diet ( the way how it was developed and the way foods were classified there) I have to admit there is some truth in the basic classification of types that need meat and don't. This is based on my observation of people I know and their eating habits.

 

[Keit]

Not just that I had 0 energy for my usual physical activities I also literally started dreaming about meet, craving raw flesh (even before I was quite fond of raw or undercooked meat but never really drolled over raw meat in the butcher shop) . Since then I consciously eat meat, I cherish it and give it due respect and I am pretty much ok with the notion that I am an omnivore.

Let me second on this. I am type B. And while I have a need to eat vegetables on a daily basis (if I don't have a fresh salad once a day I feel too heavy and kind of sick) I require meat at least once a week, especially beef.
My preferred dish is medium rare steak or carpacho (raw meat).
I have no idea why is that. I am pretty conscious about what I eat and have great respect toward animal world. It is extremely sad that we have to eat them, but there is something basic (genetic?) inside that requires that and allows me to get sufficient energy level. I also learned that plants have an ability to communicate between them, and have something basic that can be called "feelings of pain". So, as I see it, we can't live in this reality and avoid hurting someone sometimes. Don't forget that they have their lessons to learn as well.
But I have to admit that every time I eat a steak, I say thanks and sorry to this unfortunate (?) cow...

 

[Beau]

I also learned that plants have an ability to communicate between them, and have something basic that can be called "feelings of pain". So, as I see it, we can't live in this reality and avoid hurting someone sometimes.

I find it kind of weird that people are so conscious of the fact that animals suffer because we consume them but don't feel the same way about eating vegetables or fruit. I mean, a carrot screams when you pull it out of the ground. But vegetarians still eat them. Is there not a blind spot/mechanical process happening there as well? I'm not trying to play devil's advocate here but I just think that some people are a bit short-sighted when they claim that they don't eat meat because of the suffering that the animal encounters.

 

[dant]

But why stop at plants at all? Isn't all densities from 1D through 4D "fair game"?
In answer to your question, we are food in more ways than we can enumerate, yes?

Don’t you think our connection to earth has lessons? This may be a lesson we must learn about
life and that earth can only provide it with balance, and that balance has to do with what we
eat, and how we treat life in general. But as you say, we are food in many ways, agreed.

It does make a difference what we eat, I don’t thinks rocks taste very well, and my teeth
are such bad shape, I wouldn’t last a day. I guess you are trying to say that the planet
is all food, including plants, rocks, people, and subjecting dimensional food, which in one
aspect may be true, but that does not mean we should set aside conscience for life and the
power of it, and the gift it brings. I don’t know if you could call that a general rule, but
maybe discernment about life and the gift of it.

Yes, I do believe that our connections to Earth and the cosmos has many lessons. I do believe
that 'balance' or moderation is important. I agree that we ought to be discerning as to what
we consume not just our physical bodies but also for our soul. As for 'rocks', I was being
general about it, but for (1D) plants, rocks has nutrients for it and as for (3D) humans, rocks
may have 'food' therein if we know how to extract or transform its properties into food.

When I said that suffering is suggestively increased by density, you said:

What data do can you provide to prove this? I seem to recall that there is much
more "suffering" at the lower densities than at the higher densities even though there is
supposedly much less consciousness? Isn't that the opposite of what you are saying?

What would happen, if the BBM were to be pulverized (not considering life already on the planet),
do you think Earth as a planet would not "suffer" because it is after all, mostly 1D (rocks)?

I have no data, and there seems to be no data either way. You recall your data? I do think the
Earth would suffer, but we are both subjecting too much on this one.

Concerning humaneness, do you not think being humane to lower density life is part of respect
to life? I don’t think the guy who knocks the cow in the head is performing humaneness.

Well, I simply recalled from memory, somewhere, and I cannot recall the source at this time. But
as far as thinking that we are both subjecting too much about Earth, but are we? Isn't everything
connected and/or related? Seems to me it really is, and me thinks it has to be the reason why we are
all here in this physicality and in being so, there will be suffering and death, hence the lessons
for us to learn? It is only in 6D that this isn't so, since they have no need of the physical, nor are
physical, already learned/KNOW the lessons hence their place in 6D?

'Humanness', might be a subjective 3D term, as if to imply we (as 3D STS) correctly know what
'human empathy/compassion/ethics/morality' really is, and can correctly apply this term to any density
including our own? Seems strange to me, because so far, I haven't seen any objective results with
the application of this term as it is applied. Perhaps we are deluding ourselves with this 'humanness'
term in a self-righteous way blinding ourselves to what nature is telling us?

But getting to the point, you say that you believe that what knockers do is not humane by your standard,
and yet others may think knockers are performing the most humane (as if to imply a quick and "painless")
death to a cow and yet by the same token, your chewing on a piece of "live" lettuce on each bite is probably
causing more prolonged suffering than a knocker did to the cow? The question is, how long does a life-form
consciousness or soul) hang-around in a rock, compared to a plant, compared to a cow, compared to a human
being before it actually leaves the "body" for 5D? Hmm... I wonder if anyone asked that question before?
So, what does humane mean, really? Does everyone have their own ideas what "humane" means from their
own perspective?

So you said:

But according to the C's, our fates are just as bad when these 4D STS beings are coming
after us? Why should we think we are special than our 2D or 1D "friends"? Is it because the same
thing we do to others is being done to US by 4D beings and this is inhumane?

I agree, our fate could be just as bad, but that doesn’t make it acceptable. We are NOT more
special than our friends the animals, I never meant to relay that impression. We are more
partners of earth which brings up another question, why are they here? Only to eat? Ugh.
Well, obviously we learned over time that pretty much everything here can be eaten, so
this brings up other observations, such as obesity and heart disease, plants don’t seen
to cause this problem.

Why do you say: "but that doesn't make it acceptable" that we must face our fates? Maybe
it is a necessary lesson for those who must learn why they are in the physical in the first
place and by BEing in the physical, one must learn all of the lessons in order to "advance"
as if to say, to advance towards non-physicality? Seems to me that there is no "ifs" or "buts"
about it at all. You will either learn your lessons or you won't!

I also seem to think, that the C's are constantly reminding us that our being in and of the
physical simply means we do not know or understand what free-will really is, so until we have
learned some/all of the lessons, it is only by DOing the work, get closer to the truth and
that we might advance however it long it takes for each and every one of us who tries?

You say that: "We are NOT more special than our friends the animals...", but you say nothing
about our 1D "friends" (Plants, microbes, ..., "rocks", ...)? and somehow it is perfectly
acceptable to your heart's content do what you please with 1D as if 1D may not 'feel' anything,
may not have any consciousness, and you can 'break/rip/blow-up/extract rocks for it's nutrients',
or cut/break/rip/tear/chew/boil/saute/... live (microbes, micro-animals(?), ...) plants, fruits,
nuts, a salad maybe, and this treatment can/should not be applied to 2nd density at or above?

Again, I recall (from a source I forget (sorry)) a story regarding a certain monk was given a
papal-bull by the pope (i.e. was labeled as a heretic, thus death by the stake) for writing that
"rocks" have consciousness. Don't take my word for it, but did read this somewhere but I am not
certain that this is a fact, but it seems plausible given the treatment of the Cathars.

You asked "why are they (2D?) here"? Well, why are there 4 (physical) densities 1D through 4D?
Then you said: "only to eat? Ugh." My short answer is: "Why not?" Isn't this what the C's are
telling us?

You also (may) have implied that by eating MEAT(?) we also get "obesity and heart disease" and go
on to say: "plants don’t seen[/m] to cause this problem"? Well, Hemlock comes to mind. But ok,
ok, kidding aside, how about something closer to your point: Peanuts? Do not peanuts (or nuts) have
'amino acids' (as some meats do?) and if you eat a LOT of nuts, do you not become obese? How about
diet-pop (Cola), and I might add is wholly 1D, and this sort of thing not only causes obesness but
attacks just about every part of your body? This is, but one or two extreme examples, and I am sure
that with careful research, we may find that over-eating (imbalanced diet or metabolism), can
be a detriment to human health? Also, not all humans are the same so some things are healthy for some
but is unhealthy for another? For example, some people can die from eating a single nut and not necessarily
just by lodging into your windpipe.

When does one recognize that one is being abusing when one does not understand
or care to understand if offered to learn the truth?

Maybe never, this is not an argument.

Ok, 'nuf said.

Nothing can stop us from eating other humans (See: Donner party, or Jeffery Dahmer)
other than the law if caught and enforced. But here is the point: read the story of
the Donner party and what if YOU were a member of that party? A dead human body is
but an empty shell - long dead and your life hangs in the balance. What then?

Eating a human carcass blocks one from being a 4D candidate? Is there any data to
support or refute such a claim?

How can I be a member of a murdering party that I refuse? Ok, I have lost my mind,
and am now a psychopath, yum, yum. If I was not the actual one that removed the life
of the now lifeless carcass, and I was starving, as a psychopath, I would probably
eat it. But being a psychopath, it might not matter in the mind of the observer. I
think the action related to the removal is key and the enforcement as you mention.

Becoming a 4D candidate may require much discernment about many things we do not yet
understand. Whether someone had to eat a human carcass or not would depend on the
circumstances and whether or not one was starving. I never said it blocks candidacy,
I was suggesting discernment about life and what is to be eaten which is part of
knowledge attainment. If we are as the beast, and act like one, I have a hard time
seeing advancement and those who cannot stop, are more along the lines of bad overall
food.

The Donner party is not about murdering or murders at all. And psychopathy may not apply
in this case. Which is why I gave two distinct cases. First of all, the Donner party
was about getting stranded in a blizzard for which food supplies ran out, and in the end,
the survivors decided they had to eat those who died or otherwise die of starvation. Yes,
it is gruesome and yet they survived. Was this the right thing to do since they ate a
carcass without asking if it is OK to do so from the dead? That is patiently absurd.

But in the case of Dahmer, not only was Dahmer a psychopath, but he killed and took
what he wanted and for what justifiable reason? We may never know for because he was
killed in prison by another psyhcopath. Anyway what about cannibals in our history books?
The islanders, the Incas, the judahdist, and so on. Seems each had their various reasons
but the question is WHY did they even THINK of eating their own? Hmmm... We see that this
in 1D, "they" eat their own. Same as in 2D. Same as in 3D but perhaps this practice stopped
at some point in recent history? Hmm... I wonder why...

Ok, now we seem to get lost in our conversation some, so let’s try to bring this down
to home a little here so we don’t get our heads popped by big foot.

Originally you said:

I do recall that for a 4D STS entity, death is a "natural consequence" and requires no
emotion/empathy at all and it is "business as usual" and it is a cyclical harvest. Just
like human beings do when harvesting the "bounty" at the right season so that we can
"enjoy" the "fruits" of our labor?

Which by the way, here you are using C data as seemingly fact, and we should know better.
But I replied and said:

It is possible for one to die with no emotions, but it is also possible for
one to die unjustly and cry out to live whether it is harvest season or not.

Harvesting the bounty is more about plants than flesh, wouldn’t you agree? It is difficult
to make the choices when so many are available and I think that is part of the problem.
Animals are abused because there is an enormous market for their meat, if no one ate it,
then no market, and the abuse would be less.

If we seek to make a difference for ourselves and others, I tend to believe we must be
humane to the life force that begs to live, at least as much as possible, and be aware
of the differences between flesh and plant, it is easy to lump it all into one physical
density, yet we discern all this, and they cannot, so respect may be a part of a bigger
lesson that must be learned.

If we lived as the Indians and kill the buffalo, we are doing it to survive, which is not
the same as driving through the pick-up window. It may seem like survival because of the
choices made. fwiw

Then you immediately reply with this:

You use the word: "unjustly" as if there is some kind of justice to be served? May I ask
who will "serve justice" for you? Hello (I hear a reverberating echo....)?

Did you not notice that "bounty" is quoted? Why is that so? The harvest as quoted in the
bible regarding the last days refers to "the harvesting of souls and of the human bodies",
isn't this so?

You seem to miss the point that harvesting is not restricted to just plants. It also refers
to "anything that grows", that that can mean bacteria (as in yogurt), plants, fruits, pigs,
goats, cattle, ... and then extend this to 3D, humans, .... and possibly other lifeforms (4D?)
that we don't even know about which may include greys, nephilms, all that died in the great
battle and you can be sure that all of "empty shells" left around the battle fields would be
eaten and/or picked up and thrown into the vat?

As for over-eating of animals, what about plants and "rocks". Perhaps we are abusing from
greatest to least and in the following order: 1D, then 2D, and then maybe 3D? Isn't that
just about "everything" in the BBM, including the water we drink and the air we breathe?

I am not asking anyone to serve justice for me in that context.

So the knockers are you’re friends? I have a hard time believing that. We must distinguish
between the cause of death and the aftermath, when all life force energy is absent. The food
you refer to is lifeless, but removing it, or the act, is where the balance or justice sits
that alters the course.

I am aware that harvesting can be associated with the end of times, but I was not aware that
you think it is a good thing. Is that what you think? Let’s get on the same page here if possible.

I suppose there is a good harvest possible, but at the same time, I suppose there is one that is
not a good harvest. Will we be able to discern the difference?

You also suggest as we move up the scale in consumption that it might possibly be less harmful,
or less abusive. I think we now need to do more research to back up either of these claims, one
way or another.

You do also raze me a little hard about justice, I think we both are about the same age, and
guys like us may seem to want to raze each other a little more, which is ok, we’re big boys. osit

I know that you are not asking anyone to serve justice in that context, but I wanted to bring
to your attention that "dying unjustly" is subjective as it may very well be that it is part of
a lesson or that it serves no purpose whatsoever and might be a moot point? Death is what it is
and might be dictated by karma or by natural events?

Knockers are there, are they not? They do serve a purpose do they not? If certain people want
MEAT, maybe they should raise their own MEAT, butcher their own MEAT, so that they can gain
the benefits of respecting life much like some of the [nomadic] natives did and harvest the
meat only as needed and in moderation? Would this prevent abuse? Now, what are the logistics
that every family should be required to own a farm, even in [modern] cities? Would that make
any sense? If not, then why is it that we allow others to own 'mega-farms' and do the "dirty"
work for us, so that others can be free to pursue their own occupations? Is that abuse now?
Now the issue regarding a 'life force', how long do you need to wait for the 'life-force' to
leave after death before it becomes a non-life-force occupied carcass? At what age should these
lifeforms be fit to be killed? Young or old? How old should this life-form be before it become
"unfit for consumption"? Too many questions and many more to come but let's stop here for now.

Now, go back to my previous paragraph and substitute "MEAT" for "PLANTS"? Isn't that fair? How
about substituting "MEAT" for "1D", but somehow we may think we need to separate "PLANTS" from
"ROCKS" because somehow "PLANTS" are a special case. Or maybe we may need to further separate
out from 1D, the words: "Ants", "Worms", "Microbes", and so on, so that maybe we can give ourselves
a pat on the back because we are being very "humane", "moral", or "ethical" or simply "smart" about
our choices? Oh my, what a tangled web we weave! Am I really getting confused or just plain silly?
Maybe I should sow my mouth shut and STOP EATING ANYTHING AT ALL! Hmm... I don't think so. I
still have to learn by DOing "The Work" so that I can learn how to purge myself of the desire for
physicality and maybe, just maybe, I would have what it takes to become a 4D STO candidate?

Now, you asked the question if I think that harvest at the end times is a good thing? It depends on
your own level of knowledge, perhaps. For me, the end-times might be both a "good" and/or "bad" thing,
being subjective of course, in that being a "good" thing may mean there is change coming, that there
is hope that we as individuals may have a chance to advance, and the "bad" thing might be simply that
our hopes were not what we thought.

I do not see "harvest" as a good or bad thing but rather as a natural consequence of being in the
physical and the "harvest" as described in the bible is used as a metaphor to represent all life on
the BBM and that by "harvest" may also related to "the season" for which I believe is also a metaphor
that represents "The Grand Cycle". I do believe that the "harvest" will be on a very massive scale, simply
a repeat perhaps of of the Atlantean times and that the history of the cycles are being repeated. It is
quite possible that the BBM itself may change and cease to become a 3D planet and may become a 4D planet
and it is also quite possible that the solar system itself may change as well. At least this is what I
think from reading the C's and other material. As for what might happen to life on Earth? I think some
densities will advance, others may not, some may be "moved" to other planets, others may not. If Earth
4D planet (a gas planet?) it is quite possible for 3D to go directly into 4D Earth bypassing 5D since
they may not experience death and maybe this is what will happen to those who are 4D candidates?
Honestly, I do not really know from what I read, it seems this might be the case.

As for your statement:

You also suggest as we move up the scale in consumption that it might possibly be less harmful, or
less abusive.

Well, from what I have read, there is a body of research that claims that if you can
control your appetite to 1/2 of what you normally eat, you will live some percentage longer
and there is supposedly data to back up this claim. Also, we know that fasting has very beneficial
properties. Both of these would probably be good to reduce the pressures of feeding and thus less
stress on the BBM. I am all for this.

I absolutely respect your decision to eat however manner you choose to eat as this is after all
by your own actions. The lessons learned are tailored for each of us individually and the "pass"
or "fail" "test" is based on our choices, osit.

As for "razing" you, I don't see it that way, rather I see it as being a member of this forum
that everyone else is watching and/or reading and if there is a problem, we would certainly be
hearing about it, otherwise we won't! I guess for the most part, "no news is good news" and if
that be the case, then we must have been doing something right? ;)

I actually enjoying discussing this thread as it is interesting to me to get everyone's perspective
as to perhaps "see" beyond our own or at least, let other see us for what we cannot see in ourselves?

OSIT.

 

[Nienna]

I have to say that it seems to me that there is something to the blood type diet. As a child, I can remember how my mom and dad would just think that it was so wonderful to have a beef steak for dinner. I had all I could do to put it in my mouth and chew it without gagging. (I still have this problem.) I could eat hamburger, chicken, pork chops, roast without gagging, but I have always preferred the veggies. And yes, beau, when I read, some time ago, that plants have feelings just like animals, I felt terrible. (I was still eating some meat at the time.)

I, too, feel "heavy" when I eat meat. I find that it just seems to sit there in my gut. The blood type diet made sense to me that because I am type A, I have problems digesting meat. So now I understand why I prefer veggies and why the meat just seems to "sit there", not digesting or doing anything.

My husband is a BIG meat eater. I fix him his meals every day, and they always contain meat of some kind. This is how he eats, it's his way, who am I to stand in the way of this? I never try to "change" anyone to eat "my way", either. That just doesn't make sense. Now, I do object to the inhumane way that animals are slaughtered for food. The ways that this is done, to me, are criminal and psychopathic. And I would assume that the way vegetables are harvested are just as inhumane.

And I have also been thoroughly disgusted with the whole physicality thing. Not only the eating of physical things, but the elimination of them from the body, as well. To have all of this smelly flesh sitting here (my physical body) seems somehow barbaric to me. (I am not saying this the way I want to, but I cannot think of a better way of saying it right now.) Alas, I am not a great admirer of "the beauty of the human body". ;) But, that's life on the BBM in 3D. So we just keep on keeping on. Doing what we have to do. And we each are individuals and have individual needs that have to be met.

So it all comes down to doing what is right for you.

 

[brainwave]

I find it kind of weird that people are so conscious of the fact that animals suffer because we consume them but don't feel the same way about eating vegetables or fruit.

This is what I say to my animal activist friends who get on my case about eating fish after years of being vegan. I disliked eating meat since I was a child and stopped eating all meat and related products at age 14. After years of being totally vegan I started eating fish and dairy when I became pregnant with my daughter (I had serious deficiencies). It sounded nice and all to say it was done out of compassion especially since my aversion to meat started with the witnessing of a butchering. However, after honest assessment of my motives, I realized at one point my lifestyle was used a means to feel better than 'those awful meat eaters.' Knowing better now, including something about bloodtype diet and a bit of my genetic profile, some animal proteins are necessary for me. Still, I cannot eat a steak, I have tried and it just feels funny in my stomach so fish it is. While I am much more conscious about what I eat now, I try to be as aware of why I do what I do as well. I still prefer green leafy veggies but I also know these poor plants suffer just so I can eat. It is wishful thinking what some (none here I think) use to promote their particular lifestyle. The hypocrisy is annoying in fact and I know this because I lived it for a while. We are here in 3D and part of our lessons involves the fact that we feed on other lifeforms to survive. Maybe if we keep working at it, we will learn enough to no longer require this type of existence. In sum methinks it more important to focus on learning the lessons of this particular existence so we don't repeat it rather than get caught up in what I call the wishful thinking about what is or isn't the best way for everyone to eat. As we get to know our machines, I think we with know what is best individually.

 

[Approaching Infinity]

I also learned that plants have an ability to communicate between them, and have something basic that can be called "feelings of pain". So, as I see it, we can't live in this reality and avoid hurting someone sometimes.

I find it kind of weird that people are so conscious of the fact that animals suffer because we consume them but don't feel the same way about eating vegetables or fruit. I mean, a carrot screams when you pull it out of the ground.

I've never understood this argument. What we call "pain" is a name for what we experience as pain: the subjective state of the activation of pain receptors. While we cannot fully understand the individual subjective states of animals, we know that because of their possession pain receptors and certain brain regions that they "feel" pain. People with paralysis or congenital analgia do not feel "pain" but can still suffer on a mental level, due to the qualitative addition of higher levels of brain activity, i.e. cortical regions, OSIT.

I have a hard time seeing how plant communication implies "pain". Can we really say that chopping a carrot causes as much pain and suffering as stabbing a monkey? I think we're dealing with qualitative differences here. Animals feel "pain", veggies do not, as far as I can tell. Perhaps there is some sort of universal "suffering" (I'd suppose a paralyzed leg "suffers" when you stab it, even if it cannot feel "pain"), but if so, I don't think the two should be confused. We should not cause unnecessary pain for anything, but at the same time should be aware of the suffering of existence.

 

[Youngfox]

The screams of the carrots echo through my mind.
I’m sorry beau, but literal screaming carrots - really?
Has science somehow recorded this?
I am sorry but upon first reading, the thought of a screaming carrot seems quaint.
I get what you are saying but I think you might have inspired a cool handle for a punk band…Ladies and Gentlemen …Screaming Carrots!

Having ceased the consumption of the flesh almost a decade ago I have found that I am literally sickened by the greasy funeral pyre stench of my neighbour’s BBQs wafting across the yard.
Walking past the butchered flesh section at the grocers I cannot shake the impression of a painful holocaust perpetrated daily.
Driving on the highway past trucks crammed to the brim with squealing, terrified looking pigs I cannot help but think there really must be a better way.

Humans have been biting at the flesh of our fellow Earthlings for sustenance far too long for the lot of us to just drop that greasy rib and pick up a tasty, power packed chick pea curry.

I have worked on farms and been witness and participant to the slaughter of animals.
I have twisted and brought down axes upon the necks of chickens.
Then standing and watching the macabre, spastic dance of the headless birds, felt humbled by their sacrifice knowing well that they probably would not have existed here without the human desire for their flesh.
As corny as it sounds even then as a flesh eater, I would thank the little vacant eyed bird for his life and flesh that sustained my own.

I have toured factory farms and abattoirs and both places are an unnecessary hell on Earth resonating with terror.
I could not bring myself to eat the flesh of tortured animals again.
Factory farms exist only to accommodate gluttony and corporate profit.
If people exercised some self control they would not exist.
“The market” (our obese North American societies) drive the creation of such massive torture chambers.
I know vegetarian gluttons as well and eating with your eyes is a common blight no matter what you chose to run on.

At the very least I would hope that eaters could adjust their consumption, (of all things) to what is needed as opposed to the current status quo - what is desired.

All that said, I cannot stand it when vegetarian and vegan friends and acquaintances get high and mighty and condescending toward flesh eaters.
What’s the point?
Sharing my own reasoning (if and only if requested), in an insightful and non-confrontational fashion is all I am willing to do.
We are, after all, talking about fuelling our soul shells - not giant rolling status living rooms on wheels that barf particulate into the air at a rate far greater than is needed to move their arses from the couch to the “drive-thru“ window, creating toxic air that affects every living thing.

On the flipside of the self-righteous nagging vegetarian/vegan is the self-righteous flesh eater who upon hearing of my choice for fuel berates and taunts me for not joining their status quo consumptions.
Arse holes occupy both camps and we should just strive not to create petty, redundant and futile conflicts when there are far more difficult and dangerous dragons to be slain.
Oh, and when the mortally offended flesh eater finds out that I am a tobacco smoker, I am branded a “health hypocrite” because we all know how smokers are the new lepers of today’s robotic world.
(And now, thanks to Beau I can hear the tobacco screaming!)

Those of us awakened and exercising our free will know well enough not to tread on the free will of others, (not including the psychopathic enemies of humanity).
Live by example and if a flesh eater is curious about your example, do share your perspective with a sane, objective dose of reasoning.

Deckard made a good point about the robotic way people feed themselves without a thought for how these tasty bits of flesh and leaf make it to their pie holes.
But alas, that is yet another aspect of the human automaton discussed so thoroughly in these SOTT/CASS pages.
If awakened, I believe that the human (flesh eater and herbivore alike) begin to consider all actions taken on this world with new, brighter eyes and hopefully act accordingly.

We cannot even achieve rudimentary decency between humans as the holocaust in Iraq, the killing fields in Afghanistan and the crawling genocide in Palestine demonstrate daily with gut churning regularity.
To be berating people for eating the 2D flesh while they cheer on or totally ignore the daily eviscerating of the 3D flesh seems like an ultimate exercise in futility.

 

[Adaryn]

As far as i'm concerned, and how I understand it, I don't agree with that argument (the veggies feel pain, so it's as cruel to eat veggies as to eat animals) either. I don't think at all the pain level is the same in a carrot or a tomato as in a veal or a lamb. Can't we assume that the more conscious, the more pain ? And the less conscious, the less pain ?
I don't want to promote my eating style (because anyway, after a period of trying vegetarianism, I resumed eating meat). I just think this argument ("the carrot screams", or the vegetables suffer just the same as animals) doesn't stand. Not to say that it's STO to eat anything : it isn't.

 

[Cyre2067]

I'd have to agree with hkoehli, i don't understand how vegetables can feel "pain" in the human-animal sense. They simply don't have the hardware for it. Now I'm sure when a carrot is being ripped out of the ground it has the ability to 'sense' that occuring and you could subjectively label the experience painful, but you really have no way of knowing what it is the carrot experiences.

I'm sure it suffers as it's lil mini-roots are torn from the earth, it's leafy greens cut off, and it's disconnected from its nutrient supply - but pain? I mean, for a plant, how do you even establish "alive" versus "dead"? Does it die the moment it's ripped from the ground? a day after? a week? The whole notion seems nonsensical.

Personally I can't eat beef, or sausage, or large amounts of gluten. They all cause pain in my lower digestive tract in the form of cramps. So i figure that's my body telling me "Don't eat that!". Things with High Fructose Corn Syrup, or perservatives make me feel naucious, but that could be psychosomatic, just cuz i know they're bad for you. I do eat chicken, fish, pork, and lots of veggies, fruit, natural potato chips, and usually i salt everything heavily... i like a lot of salt. I also drink a lot of water. So i guess that makes sense.

I'd also have to agree with Lynne, the whole eat, poop, sleep, bit of 3D is tiresome and I wish i didn't have to do it, so i guess the only way to get there is to Work hard and keep up Hope.

 

[the_hammer]

Para- and tetraplegics do feel pain if it is incomplete, but if it is a complete rupure of the spine, they can undergo surgery without feeling any pain, but the person might suffer from high blood pressure while the knife is cutting, so yes, the body still might suffer eventhough it isn't registred in the brain.

I have read somewhere, that some trees excrete more tannin while being eaten, so the other trees standing around it can raise their tannin levels to avoid being eaten or cause a bellyache in the animals eating them. I see this as a pain reaction, as some kind of shared nervous system response which would imply some kind of consciousness, eventhough we cant hear any screams or see the fear.

Also Castaneda talks about the consciousness of the plants and their payback for pulling them out of the ground and thereby causing symptoms similar to an ordinary cold.

 

[Laura]

Vegetables probably do not feel pain "in the human animal" sense, but it's not a good idea to project our "standards" onto them. Relative to their level of existence and/or consciousness, their pain might be very great indeed. I am reminded of what the Cs once said to me about it:

Q: (L) Does it hurt a plant when we eat it?

A: Does it hurt you when a "Lizzie" eats you?

Q: (T) Yes, you see, on 4th density... we are on 3rd density
and we eat 1st and 2nd density, the 4th density eats us.
(D) If we hurt plants by eating them like the Lizzies hurt
us when they eat us, how are we to survive without eating?

A: When you no longer crave physicality, you no longer need
to "eat."

Also, people who have suffered strokes and have paralyzed limbs DO, indeed, feel pain quite often. Much depends on what part of the brain was damaged. Paralysis doesn't necessarily mean that the nerves in the limb are dead, it can mean only that the part of the brain that controls movement is damaged.

 

[dant]

Oh my. So which is better? Being a herbivore or omnivore? One or the other or
both or neither? One who is on a higher density feels less suffering than one lower?
Or is it the other way around? What if all feels pain and suffering specific to each density
level? Maybe we are trying to cross-conceptualize across densities for which we cannot
understand until we reach 4D or maybe 6D? Who can say with absolute certainty that there
is no pain and suffering at 1D? 2D? 3D? 4D? We *think* we know 3D but honestly, do we?

Anesthesiologists and researchers still trying to figure this out and do not have a complete
handle on pain and suffering for 3D? Remember those "painless and suffering free" lethal
injections at our nice prisons?

Is pain and suffering only due to chemicals or is there pain and suffering of the soul itself
irrespective of the body it inhabits?

It is possible to separate the soul/consciousness from the body painlessly and/or without
suffering? The the soul is married to the genetics (according to the C's) and so why is it
said that separating the soul from the body worst than a heroin withdrawal? Oh, was
that comment exclusively to 3D only or is that a general statement for all whom are
part of the 1-4D physical (machine)?

Looking at nature itself, why do omnivores exist? Why aren't there just herbivores
by design? Are there any species on Earth that is neither an herbivore nor omnivore
and yet consumes to live? Remember those species that live near to underground
volcano stacks in high temps and eats hydrogen sulfide? Are these species the perfect
idea of a chemivore (yeah, I made that up, but what else can you call it???) in that
there is no pain or suffering by eating H2S since these are simply chemicals are close
to primordial soup and yet these species might still be susceptible to pain and suffering?

Seems to me it is what it is and if we are objective observers of nature why
can we NOT SEE it? Buffers? Beliefs? Ignorance? Why is it that native Americans
ask forgiveness when the take from the land, and that means plants, animals,
and so on.... hmm... interesting.

I can imagine taking a plant, and to "torture" it, why not try to slowly pull the threads
apart from within? Why not slowly starve the plant to death denying it water and/or
nutrients? Maybe we can squeeze the juice out with a juicer machine, grinder, pulverizer,
... just as the same we do for any of the 1-2D entities? Seems 4D has the same plans for
us, no? Do you think the 4D's are more psychopathic (especially the STS variety? and not
STO's) Are there not both STS and STO's at 4D? Nothing is said of 4D STO's diet... especially
those who have "just started" and have not learned to be "variable"? Hmm.... interesting.

Maybe 3D thinks that if something screams or visibly contorts itself, we believe it is suffering and
in pain, but apparently we cannot see or hear the same with lower densities so it is OK? Did you
ever look at a plant in slow-motion and see how it withers death under a hot sun? Would you
know if pain and suffering was happening right before your eyes and if you could get a powerful
microphone translator and "hear" the screams, would you then recognize it as such? So since we
cannot is it OK, to continue what we do, business as usual, out of sight and out of mind that which
we are possibly ignorant of? Can we abuse taking too much plants from the land in the same way
we do for the animals? Burn tree, rape the land, and so on and basically wipe out our environment
that hosts millions if not billions of species? Oh my, my.

Of course these are rambling thoughts in my mind and I am just talking out loud. FWIW and OSIT.

[edit: oh! many responded and took care of it! Thanks Laura!]