Guest guest Posted June 24, 2007 Report Share Posted June 24, 2007 And perhaps some people are determined to hold onto, at almost any cost, a way of thinking, a belief system, wherein we humans decide, " Yes, we'll kill this, and no, we'll let that live. " Our track record as a species is not so great in this regard ... I once asked several historians whether they could name a single time in human history when armies were not marching, people were not being put to death for their beliefs, and so forth. So far, not one historian has been able to point to a single day in human history when peace occurred. We must let go of ALL our killing, large and small. And we need it not, if we will live healthfully. That you have something to kill simply implies that you have damaged yourself, diminished your own vital capacity. Or, you can go on killing and explaining why it's a great idea. Best, Elchanan _____ rawfood [rawfood ] On Behalf Of neal Sunday, June 24, 2007 10:34 AM rawfood Re: [Raw Food] Re: Garlic Redux On Saturday 23 June 2007 20:43, The Raw Retreat wrote: > I don't think there was any disagreement that garlic kills bacteria. > The question was is it a healthy food? > That it kills bacteria as well as it does should make us suspicious. > Do I want all the bacteria in my body killed off? > We avoid antibiotics because they kill off intestinal bacteria. I > assume garlic does the same. > Two other examples of nature came to mind. Xylitol which occurs naturally in many plants and Stevia a genus of 100+ plants (sunflower family) both of which are natural alternatives to sugar. Both are known for anti-bacterial properties as well as many other healthful properties which aid the body in correcting dis-ease. Perhaps nature in its wisdom knows it is mans' nature to not be perfect and so provides these other resources for when they are needed. All in moderation. neal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 24, 2007 Report Share Posted June 24, 2007 killing is wrong. we are damaged every time we do it..even in self defense. why it continues so chronically is beyond me except to say the ego is a very powerful thing...it acts before our subconcious can process the result. very sad.. anna On 6/24/07, Elchanan <Elchanan wrote: > And perhaps some people are determined to hold onto, at almost any cost, a > way of thinking, a belief system, wherein we humans decide, " Yes, we'll kill > this, and no, we'll let that live. " > > Our track record as a species is not so great in this regard ... I once > asked several historians whether they could name a single time in human > history when armies were not marching, people were not being put to death > for their beliefs, and so forth. So far, not one historian has been able to > point to a single day in human history when peace occurred. > > We must let go of ALL our killing, large and small. And we need it not, if > we will live healthfully. That you have something to kill simply implies > that you have damaged yourself, diminished your own vital capacity. > > Or, you can go on killing and explaining why it's a great idea. > > Best, > Elchanan > _____ > > rawfood [rawfood ] On Behalf Of > neal > Sunday, June 24, 2007 10:34 AM > rawfood > Re: [Raw Food] Re: Garlic Redux > > > On Saturday 23 June 2007 20:43, The Raw Retreat wrote: > > I don't think there was any disagreement that garlic kills bacteria. > > The question was is it a healthy food? > > That it kills bacteria as well as it does should make us suspicious. > > Do I want all the bacteria in my body killed off? > > We avoid antibiotics because they kill off intestinal bacteria. I > > assume garlic does the same. > > > > Two other examples of nature came to mind. Xylitol which occurs naturally in > > many plants and Stevia a genus of 100+ plants (sunflower family) both of > which are natural alternatives to sugar. Both are known for anti-bacterial > properties as well as many other healthful properties which aid the body in > correcting dis-ease. > > Perhaps nature in its wisdom knows it is mans' nature to not be perfect and > so > provides these other resources for when they are needed. All in moderation. > > neal. > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 25, 2007 Report Share Posted June 25, 2007 thank u for ur opinion neal. i maintain mine. humans suffer when they kill others. This is so well supported as to be beyond question. animals kiliing was a discussion i had a few weeks ago on the mensa parapsychology group i belong to. i postulated that killing for food is a construct because every generation is taught by the prior how to hunt. If fed by hand and raised in a domestic environment even wild animals do not kill for food or sport...just self defense if threatened.. search youtube for video of cheetah mothering baby urangatan....its fascinating...it should have been an appetizer..but wasnt.. and your sheesh serves only to show how well the machine has trained you..i thought better of you than that.. there really are different ways of doing things you take for granted...killing should never be assumed to be good..no matter how hardened you are to it.. peace anna ps. The group was really quite open to the argument...wish u would have been there. Keep in mind im a theology major.. On 6/24/07, neal <kneel.pardoe wrote: > On Sunday 24 June 2007 19:52, Anna Bishop wrote: > > killing is wrong. > > > > we are damaged every time we do it..even in self defense. > > > > why it continues so chronically is beyond me except to say the ego is > > a very powerful thing...it acts before our subconcious can process the > > result. > > > > very sad.. > > > > anna > > How did the subject get changed to be about killing? > > I would say nature would not agree with you. > > Living is life living on life on all levels. Its how the whole thing works. > > sheesh! > > neal. > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 25, 2007 Report Share Posted June 25, 2007 On Sunday 24 June 2007 19:52, Anna Bishop wrote: > killing is wrong. > > we are damaged every time we do it..even in self defense. > > why it continues so chronically is beyond me except to say the ego is > a very powerful thing...it acts before our subconcious can process the > result. > > very sad.. > > anna How did the subject get changed to be about killing? I would say nature would not agree with you. Living is life living on life on all levels. Its how the whole thing works. sheesh! neal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 25, 2007 Report Share Posted June 25, 2007 hi neal.. i wont have a chance to answer you till tuesday afternoon..but i want to...so hold that thought.. Im gonna throw out what i posted on the other list.. i mention the theology angle because it helps to understand my take on it..i look at higher reaasons for basic things... ill just say this now...death and killing are not the same thing. talk to u soon thx anna On 6/24/07, neal <kneel.pardoe wrote: > On Monday 25 June 2007 00:39, Anna Bishop wrote: > > thank u for ur opinion neal. > > > > i maintain mine. > > > > humans suffer when they kill others. This is so well supported as to > > be beyond question. > > > > animals kiliing was a discussion i had a few weeks ago on the mensa > > parapsychology group i belong to. > > > > i postulated that killing for food is a construct because every > > generation is taught by the prior how to hunt. If fed by hand and > > raised in a domestic environment even wild animals do not kill for > > food or sport...just self defense if threatened.. > > What about domestic cats? And there are many breeds of domestic dogs that > will > also just kill by instinct. > > > > > search youtube for video of cheetah mothering baby urangatan....its > > fascinating...it should have been an appetizer..but wasnt.. > > I haven't seen that but know of other similar examples, yes they are > fascinating and marvelous to witness. > > > and your sheesh serves only to show how well the machine has trained > > you.. > > no,no, it was done in full awareness. I had a pious ego too once, but it was > a > part of the conditioning. > > > i thought better of you than that.. > > and I return the line to you. Why do you think I'd be bothered by thought? > > > there really are different ways of doing things you take for > > granted... > > don't understand. > > > killing should never be assumed to be good..no matter how > > hardened you are to it.. > > I did not say it was good or bad, just that it exists and it is only your > judgement that I am hardened to it. > If killing on any scale is bad, then to be ridiculous, stop breathing > because > the oxygen you breath goes mainly into protecting your body from constant > attack and oxygen molecules are used to burn up the offenders. And stop > eating, because all you eat once lived and killing is terminating life. That > was the simple point of life living on life. > > > > > peace > > anna > > > > ps. The group was really quite open to the argument...wish u would > > have been there. Keep in mind im a theology major.. > > Yes, I would have enjoyed debating that one with you, maybe. > oops, I just looked again and almost did. LOL > (yikes, I do hope you are referring to the parapsychology group) > > neal. > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 25, 2007 Report Share Posted June 25, 2007 On Monday 25 June 2007 00:39, Anna Bishop wrote: > thank u for ur opinion neal. > > i maintain mine. > > humans suffer when they kill others. This is so well supported as to > be beyond question. > > animals kiliing was a discussion i had a few weeks ago on the mensa > parapsychology group i belong to. > > i postulated that killing for food is a construct because every > generation is taught by the prior how to hunt. If fed by hand and > raised in a domestic environment even wild animals do not kill for > food or sport...just self defense if threatened.. What about domestic cats? And there are many breeds of domestic dogs that will also just kill by instinct. > > search youtube for video of cheetah mothering baby urangatan....its > fascinating...it should have been an appetizer..but wasnt.. I haven't seen that but know of other similar examples, yes they are fascinating and marvelous to witness. > and your sheesh serves only to show how well the machine has trained > you.. no,no, it was done in full awareness. I had a pious ego too once, but it was a part of the conditioning. > i thought better of you than that.. and I return the line to you. Why do you think I'd be bothered by thought? > there really are different ways of doing things you take for > granted... don't understand. > killing should never be assumed to be good..no matter how > hardened you are to it.. I did not say it was good or bad, just that it exists and it is only your judgement that I am hardened to it. If killing on any scale is bad, then to be ridiculous, stop breathing because the oxygen you breath goes mainly into protecting your body from constant attack and oxygen molecules are used to burn up the offenders. And stop eating, because all you eat once lived and killing is terminating life. That was the simple point of life living on life. > > peace > anna > > ps. The group was really quite open to the argument...wish u would > have been there. Keep in mind im a theology major.. Yes, I would have enjoyed debating that one with you, maybe. oops, I just looked again and almost did. LOL (yikes, I do hope you are referring to the parapsychology group) neal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 25, 2007 Report Share Posted June 25, 2007 On Monday 25 June 2007 02:20, Anna Bishop wrote: > hi neal.. > > i wont have a chance to answer you till tuesday afternoon..but i want > to...so hold that thought.. Im gonna throw out what i posted on the > other list.. > > i mention the theology angle because it helps to understand my take on > it..i look at higher reaasons for basic things... > > ill just say this now...death and killing are not the same thing. > > talk to u soon > thx > anna OK, neal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 25, 2007 Report Share Posted June 25, 2007 On Monday 25 June 2007 02:20, Anna Bishop wrote: > i mention the theology angle because it helps to understand my take on > it..i look at higher reaasons for basic things... p.s. ok, mine is a Nondual view, but I prefer to say that life is expressing through the infinite possibilities of existence in this immediate moment. neal is just one of them. LOL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 25, 2007 Report Share Posted June 25, 2007 At Sun, 24 Jun 2007 it looks like Elchanan composed: > And perhaps some people are determined to hold onto, at almost any cost, a > way of thinking, a belief system, wherein we humans decide, " Yes, we'll kill > this, and no, we'll let that live. " > > Our track record as a species is not so great in this regard ... I once > asked several historians whether they could name a single time in human > history when armies were not marching, people were not being put to death > for their beliefs, and so forth. So far, not one historian has been able to > point to a single day in human history when peace occurred. > I was told, in regards to the thriving business of arms dealers, that there is, and always was, no less that 26 wars going on world wide at any given time. -- " Health nuts are going to feel stupid someday, lying in hospitals dying of nothing. " -- Redd Foxx Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 25, 2007 Report Share Posted June 25, 2007 Neal, if you wish to operate at the level of dogs and cats, you are, of course, free to make that choice. This entire conversation arose because of your attachment to garlic etc. for antibiotic properties and the like. Remember writing that you could think of no polite way to say <<whatever it was>> about someone who would advocate away from such " treatments " ?? This thread is of your creation ... Elchanan _____ rawfood [rawfood ] On Behalf Of neal Sunday, June 24, 2007 7:52 PM rawfood Re: [Raw Food] Killing is killing ... (WAS: Garlic Redux) What about domestic cats? And there are many breeds of domestic dogs that will also just kill by instinct. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 25, 2007 Report Share Posted June 25, 2007 Yes, in fact, the US alone is engaged in more wars than that, 24x7, 365 days/year. It all goes back to Machiavelli's original proposal to the Medici, 9 centuries or so ago. Elchanan _____ rawfood [rawfood ] On Behalf Of Bill-Schoolcraft Sunday, June 24, 2007 11:08 PM rawfood Re: [Raw Food] Killing is killing ... (WAS: Garlic Redux) At Sun, 24 Jun 2007 it looks like Elchanan composed: > And perhaps some people are determined to hold onto, at almost any cost, a > way of thinking, a belief system, wherein we humans decide, " Yes, we'll kill > this, and no, we'll let that live. " > > Our track record as a species is not so great in this regard ... I once > asked several historians whether they could name a single time in human > history when armies were not marching, people were not being put to death > for their beliefs, and so forth. So far, not one historian has been able to > point to a single day in human history when peace occurred. > I was told, in regards to the thriving business of arms dealers, that there is, and always was, no less that 26 wars going on world wide at any given time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 30, 2007 Report Share Posted June 30, 2007 I was going through some old emails and I got to thinking that WAR is the opposite of RAW :-) Emrawfood , " Elchanan " <Elchanan wrote: > > Yes, in fact, the US alone is engaged in more wars than that, 24x7, 365 > days/year. It all goes back to Machiavelli's original proposal to the > Medici, 9 centuries or so ago. > > Elchanan > _____ > > rawfood [rawfood ] On Behalf Of > Bill-Schoolcraft > Sunday, June 24, 2007 11:08 PM > rawfood > Re: [Raw Food] Killing is killing ... (WAS: Garlic Redux) > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 30, 2007 Report Share Posted June 30, 2007 and how profound is that? i commented on the parapsychology list im on, a few days ago, that meat eaters tend to be more violent and aggressive....and i got flamed by a meat eater....it was so very funny...the veggies just disagreed with me calmly....they missed the episode completely....i guess cuz they kno the guy.. but i did laugh.... peace and veggies anna On 6/29/07, emusedmary <emusedmary wrote: > I was going through some old emails > and I got to thinking that > WAR > is the opposite of RAW > :-) > Emrawfood , " Elchanan " <Elchanan wrote: > > > > Yes, in fact, the US alone is engaged in more wars than that, 24x7, 365 > > days/year. It all goes back to Machiavelli's original proposal to the > > Medici, 9 centuries or so ago. > > > > Elchanan > > _____ > > > > rawfood [rawfood ] On > Behalf Of > > Bill-Schoolcraft > > Sunday, June 24, 2007 11:08 PM > > rawfood > > Re: [Raw Food] Killing is killing ... (WAS: Garlic Redux) > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 30, 2007 Report Share Posted June 30, 2007 Ha! and fruity smiles and a veggie hug back at ya! Em rawfood , " Anna Bishop " <mowthpeece wrote: > > and how profound is that? > > i commented on the parapsychology list im on, a few days ago, that > meat eaters tend to be more violent and aggressive....and i got flamed > by a meat eater....it was so very funny...the veggies just disagreed > with me calmly....they missed the episode completely....i guess cuz > they kno the guy.. > but i did laugh.... > > peace and veggies > anna > > On 6/29/07, emusedmary <emusedmary wrote: > > I was going through some old emails > > and I got to thinking that > > WAR > > is the opposite of RAW > > :-) > > Emrawfood , " Elchanan " <Elchanan@> wrote: > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 30, 2007 Report Share Posted June 30, 2007 I disagree with the theory that eating meat makes one aggressive of violent and eating veggies only makes one non-aggressive, non violent. I think it is in their nature to be what they are. I just think that aggressive people just tend to be meat eaters. And veggie only eaters just tend to be more docile. I don't think you could take a docile vegitarian and inlude meat in their diet and change their personality into a violent or an aggressive one. (lol, unless they thought it was the way to get their veggies back) And I don't think you can take a meat eater, and feed him/her veggies and make them docile. I know many, many, many, people that eat meat that are as kind, docile and gentle as they come. I believe it has more to do with their spirit than their diet. Belinda > and how profound is that? > > i commented on the parapsychology list im on, a few days ago, that > meat eaters tend to be more violent and aggressive....and i got flamed > by a meat eater....it was so very funny...the veggies just disagreed > with me calmly....they missed the episode completely....i guess cuz > they kno the guy.. > but i did laugh.... > > peace and veggies > anna > > On 6/29/07, emusedmary <emusedmary wrote: > > I was going through some old emails > > and I got to thinking that > > WAR > > is the opposite of RAW > > :-) > > Emrawfood , " Elchanan " <Elchanan@> wrote: > > > > > > Yes, in fact, the US alone is engaged in more wars than that, 24x7, 365 > > > days/year. It all goes back to Machiavelli's original proposal to the > > > Medici, 9 centuries or so ago. > > > > > > Elchanan > > > _____ > > > > > > rawfood [rawfood ] On > > Behalf Of > > > Bill-Schoolcraft > > > Sunday, June 24, 2007 11:08 PM > > > rawfood > > > Re: [Raw Food] Killing is killing ... (WAS: Garlic Redux) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted June 30, 2007 Report Share Posted June 30, 2007 Personally, the experiences I have being vegan and non vegan support for my own truth that meat/animal product eating made me of a more self-centered/victimized and horny disposition. When I went back to vegan, raw even, back came that peaceful watery flowing serenity. I realize that these are my own choices, based on my own understandings and perceptions, to eat different ways, but also by being mindful of self during and after the choices in the thread of continued experience allowed this one to observe shifts in being and perception. Everything is outside of coincidence, so, do and observe, you will get exactly what you deserve. So, this is my own truth, and it is my pleasure to announce that I will stay vegan for this very reason. Blessings to all of you on your paths, whatever they may be, for they are perfect ones ever unfolding reality in beautifully unique ways. Love, Bobby Belinda <MistyBlueTN wrote: I disagree with the theory that eating meat makes one aggressive of violent and eating veggies only makes one non-aggressive, non violent. I think it is in their nature to be what they are. I just think that aggressive people just tend to be meat eaters. And veggie only eaters just tend to be more docile. I don't think you could take a docile vegitarian and inlude meat in their diet and change their personality into a violent or an aggressive one. (lol, unless they thought it was the way to get their veggies back) And I don't think you can take a meat eater, and feed him/her veggies and make them docile. I know many, many, many, people that eat meat that are as kind, docile and gentle as they come. I believe it has more to do with their spirit than their diet. Belinda > and how profound is that? > > i commented on the parapsychology list im on, a few days ago, that > meat eaters tend to be more violent and aggressive....and i got flamed > by a meat eater....it was so very funny...the veggies just disagreed > with me calmly....they missed the episode completely....i guess cuz > they kno the guy.. > but i did laugh.... > > peace and veggies > anna > > On 6/29/07, emusedmary <emusedmary wrote: > > I was going through some old emails > > and I got to thinking that > > WAR > > is the opposite of RAW > > :-) > > Emrawfood , " Elchanan " <Elchanan@> wrote: > > > > > > Yes, in fact, the US alone is engaged in more wars than that, 24x7, 365 > > > days/year. It all goes back to Machiavelli's original proposal to the > > > Medici, 9 centuries or so ago. > > > > > > Elchanan > > > _____ > > > > > > rawfood [rawfood ] On > > Behalf Of > > > Bill-Schoolcraft > > > Sunday, June 24, 2007 11:08 PM > > > rawfood > > > Re: [Raw Food] Killing is killing ... (WAS: Garlic Redux) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 1, 2007 Report Share Posted July 1, 2007 I can only talk from my own experience. I was once a meat eater and a somewhat violent person. I have notice that since becomeing vegan I tend to be alot more calm and I am much slower to anger. Rudy ______________________________\ ____ oneSearch: Finally, mobile search that gives answers, not web links. http://mobile./mobileweb/onesearch?refer=1ONXIC Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 1, 2007 Report Share Posted July 1, 2007 I guess it just depends on the person. Wonder if it could have something to do with the junk that is fed the meat animals. Hormones, steroids, and who knows what else. I just know, I know of many people, both men and woment who do include meat in their diet that are as gentle and non-aggressive as any vegan. Spirtual people that love everyone and causes no one any harm. It also appears by the posts, that raw vegeterians and vegans develope and believe certain philosophy's along with their journey of eating this way that would settle the most violent of people if they believed, accepted and lived this way. I just believe it is more the state of mind of a vegan than it is the food. The food is just part of it. You could take the most hardend of criminals and feed them veggies only and they are still going to be the same, unless you can get inside them and rewire their way of thinking and help them to change the spirit that lies within. And most everyone knows that any attitude is changed when changing from and unhealthy diet in an unhealthy body to a healthy diet. Most people that do not feel good, has a bad attitude and outlook on everything. Belinda I can only talk from my own experience. I was once a > meat eater and a somewhat violent person. I have > notice that since becomeing vegan I tend to be alot > more calm and I am much slower to anger. Rudy > > > > ____________________ ______________ > oneSearch: Finally, mobile search > that gives answers, not web links. > http://mobile./mobileweb/onesearch?refer=1ONXIC > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 1, 2007 Report Share Posted July 1, 2007 Sounds like eating and living vegan decreases the testostorone:o). .....or it could be that the meat products increases it. Belinda > Personally, the experiences I have being vegan and non vegan support for my own truth that meat/animal product eating made me of a more self-centered/victimized and horny disposition. When I went back to vegan, raw even, back came that peaceful watery flowing serenity. I realize that these are my own choices, based on my own understandings and perceptions, to eat different ways, but also by being mindful of self during and after the choices in the thread of continued experience allowed this one to observe shifts in being and perception. Everything is outside of coincidence, so, do and observe, you will get exactly what you deserve. So, this is my own truth, and it is my pleasure to announce that I will stay vegan for this very reason. Blessings to all of you on your paths, whatever they may be, for they are perfect ones ever unfolding reality in beautifully unique ways. > > Love, > Bobby > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted July 2, 2007 Report Share Posted July 2, 2007 - Anna Bishop >i commented on the parapsychology list im on, a few days ago, that meat eaters tend to be more violent and aggressive....and i got flamed by a meat eater....it was so very funny...the veggies just disagreed with me calmly....they missed the episode completely....i guess cuz they kno the guy.. but i did laugh.... hehe that's amusing. A lady I know told me about a year ago that she and her children, in particular her son, are " allergic to amines " - amines being the term they use for broken and denatured proteins, from decomposition and cooking of meat. So they can only eat meat that's been freshly killed, within a few days. One of the loudest symptoms is irrational anger, irritability, and violence (in the younger ones this is physical). Caron Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.