The concept of bringing a soul into this world has been mentioned multiple times in this thread itself, and whenever the question of having children has been brought up elsewhere. And whenever it has been mentioned in that context it has often read like the underlying assumption has been that the child will have an individualised soul. I'd like to comment on that. (P.S: the comment isn't aimed at you specifically Andrian, I just quoted your post as it's the most recent mention of a 'soul' in this thread.)
- As we have learned from the C's, 50% of people on our planet don't have an individualised soul, they are the so-called Organic Portals.
- As further mentioned in the sessions, when a person starts to wake up the system seeks to insert more 'units' into that person's life to hinder that waking up process.
- Those who have followed the conversations and reading assignments about genetic research will remember the concept of genetic entropy, i.e. genes decreasing in quality over time due to accumulating harmful mutations. This could further decrease the likelihood of a potential child's ability to carry an individualised soul. As Laura mentioned in the below comment in another thread:
This means that the chances that your child will have an individualised soul as opposed to being an OP are lower than 50%, possibly significantly so.
I guess it may be a good idea to re-read the OP thread to help you decide whether you will be able to raise an individual with such qualities. To me, the most important parts of that thread to review would be OPs' draining influence on souled individuals - which I'm guessing is why the system seeks to implement more OP units into the lives of those who begin to follow the path of seeking the truth.
And with that in mind, are you confident that you can protect yourselves to an extent that your own progress will not be derailed? And can you offer your child your unconditional acceptance even if they will never follow your footsteps, and will lead a largely materialistic lifestyle without any inclination towards spiritualism or soul evolution, at least not in the way we understand it here?
Another thing is that a souled individual who has not started to wake up is not really any better than an OP. So the possibility of your child being an OP is not the only factor to consider. For even if your child will carry an individualised soul, that soul may not be at a stage where asking deeper questions even interests them. They may be one of the souls who will be repeating the 3D cycle. I guess that won't be an issue if you accept this as a possibility and you think you will be OK with whoever your child may be. As long as you can protect them from crazy influences of the modern society you may still raise a well adjusted human being. But to what extent can you really protect them from those influences?
Given how many parents take pride in their children following their footsteps in the areas of life that matter to them I thought the above points may be worth mentioning. This may of course be a lesson in accepting someone as they are and that in itself will have some value.
That's how I'm looking at it as well. And with that in mind, having children isn't necessarily a lesson needed in order to progress, at least not for everyone.
I had to come back to that post because I've been noticing something in real life that is incredible, and not in a good way: the huge number of children born with autism and special needs these days. I live in London, and I've heard that in some other countries in Europe it's not as bad but from what I heard there's also a huge problem is the US too.
For context, I live with a sibling who has young kids, and it baffles me the number of kids in my nephews' school who have autism. And that's not, factoring in the number of people I personally know in my social circle (friends and acquaintances) who have children with autism. Recently, I even learned that someone I know who is pregnant is having a hard time because the foetus is thought to have brain malformation. Not only that but in my current role, as part of one of my projects, I deal with vulnerable individuals, which include special needs children. My job only covers specific parts of London, but to give you a bit of perspective, unless it's maybe a two or three-storey building, I don't know one building under out remit without a household with an autistic child. And in tower buildings, there's usually at least two or three families who have at least one child (sometimes there are several children) with autism, and keep in mind that I'm only talking about cases that I personally know because I've personally dealt with them. However, I've talked to social workers and teachers, and they too mentioned the same thing. Honestly, it made me wonder how the entire system could cope long-term.
And just so you know, my team leader has a child with autism, and so does one of his cousins. A colleague of mine also has a child with autism. And one time my team leader mentioned that her husband's manager has a child with autism. I also once casually had a conversation with the mother of one of my nephew's friend and she mentioned that her boss had to take some leave to take care of his severely autistic teenage daughter.
Then, I also know tons of people who apparently have ADHD and under one form of medication or another. And every other day, while watching/ reading the news I learn of diseases and illnesses and genetic malformations that I never knew existed.
I know that vaccines have been linked to autism, but is it truly enough to account for the number of kids with autism? And I guess diet plays a role too, but again is that it? Sometimes, I do wonder if the number of special needs kids who are born and who though society doesn't want to admit the vast majority will need care for all their lives isn't a sign that humanity has exhausted itself. It strikes me that one of the big reasons humans reproduced was to continue their line and so that parents would have someone to take care of them as they age. But the pendulum is swinging to the other side. With the number of special needs kids being born these days, we're slowly having a society where parents and society will need to care for their young forever because the young unfortunately do not have the capacity.
Also, if people notice, there's a massive push for seeing what are mental disorders that have a clear impact on someone's capacity to think and take care of themselves as neurodiversity. But it occurs to me that based on the number of children who are special needs and are going to be born with special needs, society has no choice but to push for "blind acceptance" because otherwise, there would be a huge number of moot questions to answer about the number of current and future adults that cannot truly work and cannot live unassisted and how the government can cope with the cost of ensuring their continued wellbeing. For example, I have a friend who works in a supermarket in retail. The company has a quota of people with disability they have to take. Most of them tend to be adults with mental disability (e.g., Down Syndrome, autism, other learning disorder...etc). My friend was telling me that there is a team whose sole purpose is to undo all the mistakes that the workers with mental disability do. Aside from that, there are other significant cognitive issues that makes it very delicate to manage them.
I do think that for conditions outside of autism, the advance of medicine may be an answer. I often hear of babies/ children/ young adults with incurable diseases who often have severe cognitive and/ or physical disabilities. Many are
maintained alive through extreme treatments and often die rather young with a lot of pain and suffering involved. But recently it occurred to me that as harsh as it sounds, decades ago, those individuals wouldn't have survived because medicine wasn't where it is today. So I'm thinking that perhaps it factors in the rise of special needs children/ individuals. In the same vein, while talking with elderly women, I realised that in the past, miscarriages was a lot more common than it is today, again because medicine wasn't as advanced as it is today.
However, again, someone I was talking to recently raised the point that in their opinion miscarriage is a natural process that evict foetus that weren't properly formed/ weak and that potentially would have resulted in an unhealthy child. However, because right now medicine tries to ensure that all pregnancies go to term/ result in a child one way or the other, it means that overall there are less miscarriages, but also result in children that likely wouldn't have survived without external help because they perhaps weren't healthy/ strong foetus to begin with and result in children who have health conditions. Their overall point was that the body knew best what it needed to reject. I really don't know enough about this topic to give an informed opinion but it was an interesting perspective.
It's not an answer to the thread question, but I couldn't see where else it could fit. And I was wondering too if others in the forum had noticed the same thing. We're living in strange times. By the way, I don't mean to offend anyone with this post, and if you find anything insensitive do know that it wasn't intended. I'm not yet 30, so when I talk about when I was young, I'm not talking about a time that far away. However, when I was young, I literally only knew one person with a learning disability. Everybody in the neighbour knew them. Even at school neither me nor my siblings ever had someone with a mental disorder. But my siblings and I often talk about how much everything has changed, and nowadays, mental disorder of one kind or the other has just become so common. Granted we grew up in a different country in Europe but still.