white rice vs. milk etc..

December 10, 2004

-

Amy P.

>I don't know how all farms are ran, but a dairly cow is not

>equivalent to a human females in milk production. Humans only start

>to lactate becasue of hormonal changes that occurn during pregnancy.

>Theoretically if she contined to breastfeed daily, she would not stop

>lactating - Look into wet-nurses & /or women who still nuse 2 & 3 year

>olds. Cows do not need the hormone to start lactating, so they do not

>even have to have a calf to give milk. Furthermore, it is far more

>painful for a cow to " hold " the milk than to have it expressed. BTW

>the expressing of milk has been described as massage (pleasurable)

>like. (I have never given birth, so I can not vouce for the

>sensation; however, I have seen cats nursing and it appears to be

>pleasurable. I know for me that when my cat " kneads " me it is quite

>pleasurable.)

I assume you did not read the links I placed with my post, and I'll asume you

did not read my post correctly, because I used the terms 'against ones will' as

aposed to one making a free choice.

I was not refering to the human cows production of milk being the same as a

dairy cow. I made reference to the treatment of the mother calf having it's calf

taken away against it's will, and sugesting to consider what it would be like to

be a human mother and have your child taken away from you. I then made reference

to the farmer then using the dairy cow who has just given birth and therefore

lactating as nature would have it in order to feed her calf, and sugested

comparing this to a human mother having her child taken away and then someone

milking her against her will. Sex is a pleasurable act as well, but ask someone

who has been raped / had a sexual act forced upon them and see if it was also

pleasurable.

Isn't one aspect of being vegetarian the consideration of the animals rights as

another form of creation. Isn't it only arrogance that sugests that we have the

right to do as we will with their lives, and not to consider the natural will of

the animal.

So if cows are allowed to live freely and if as you sugest they produce milk

without the process of childbirth, does nature not have a way of the cow being

able to release the milk? Or do cows not produce milk in the same quantity, as

when in in a dairy environment, for it to be a problem.

I have no problem if someone chooses to drink milk, but at least be willing to

accept what has gone into the production of that milk. And at least honour the

dairy cow who has made this possible.

Pete...

http://www.primalvision.net

" There is a vitality, a life force, an energy, a quickening, that is translated

through you into action, and because there is only one of you in all time, this

expression is unique. And if you block it, it will never exist through any

other medium and will be lost " - Martha Graham

December 10, 2004

Quote: " Your post seems reactionary with loose statement and no

facts. "

So does yours David! <G!> Talk about the pot calling the kettle

black!

Quote: " Because i don't make my personal choices based on " God " or

the concept of sin, etc. i cant get behind your reasoning "

Sin? as in basic Christian mythology? That is not the God I referred

to. I don't do religion. And since I don't believe in your godly

concepts of sin, why put words in my mouth??? (Or rather why try to

type with my keyboard?) Where did I write anything about sin??

Absolutely puzzled by your post but... whatever!

, " david* "

<hempprince> wrote:

>

> Your post seems reactionary with loose statement and no facts.

> Obviously when u make absolute statements like God made

> cows for humans to have milk and soforth, there is no room for

> debate. Drinking milk is not like slurping syrup or coke but i

don't

> see it as the best stuff to consume. There are alternative ways of

> getting what your body gets from milk drinking.

> Shouting " LIES " doesnt make your case though your personal

> experience does. You were obviously lacking something that led

> you back to milk but your arguement about all that surplus milk

> isnt based on logic. Just making statements like " butter is also

> excellent " and harmones will " kill you " is unhelpful since u

didn't

> offer any evidence. I'd say the reason we have surplus milk is

> that an industry was created by humans though it fofills a need.

> When i added dairy into my diet it made me feel worse and my

> cholestrol count went up besides weight gain. You can get

> calcium from many sources and i cannot think of a reason to

> drink milk though i recognize that people have different needs

> and desires.

> Because i don't make my personal choices based on " God " or

> the concept of sin, etc. i cant get behind your reasoning. Groups

> like this are only to challenge us to become more aware and

> think about the choices we make. You have to discover what

> works for u but many are so out of touch with their bodies that

> dietary suggestions and education is needed.

> There is plenty of evidence to support the fact that breeding

cattle

> is causing environmental problems all over the world and it's

> time to find alternatives. Cows use lots of resources besides

> taking up valuable farm land.

> I am glad that some people are considerate enough to support

> friendlier farming practices as i witnessed in Switzerland, but i

> believe that many people can do without milk. Not everyone is

> willing to have a cow in their yard or get up to milk them.

>

> d*

>

> " spirit1hawk " <irvine@p...> wrote:

> >

> > That's debatable. Milk being bad for you is one of THE

> GREATEST LIES OUT THERE. It's the antibiotics and the

> hormones that will kill you.

> > Once I reintroduced organic milk in my diet, I felt alive! Cow

> milk is the best I could have done for my body. Emphasis on MY.

> > God made cow with way more milk they could use because It

> had in mind that humans would partake of the surplus. Unless

> you're lactose intolerant there's nothing wrong w/milk quite the

> contrary. Except for the belief that it's bad for you. Then it's

the

> belief that will harm you, not the milk itself. Butter is also

> excellent. Wouldn't touch the " I can't believe... " if they paid

me to!

> >

>

> > > Veronica , " spirit1hawk " <irvine@p...> wrote:

> >

> > That's debatable. Milk being bad for you is one of THE

> GREATEST LIES

> > OUT THERE. It's the antibiotics and the hormones that will kill

> you.

> > Once I reintroduced organic milk in my diet, I felt alive! Cow

> milk

> > is the best I could have done for my body. Emphasis on MY.

> >

> > God made cow with way more milk they could use because It

> had in

> > mind that humans would partake of the surplus. Unless you're

> lactose

> > intolerant there's nothing wrong w/milk quite the contrary.

> Except

> > for the belief that it's bad for you. Then it's the belief that

will

> > harm you, not the milk itself. Butter is also excellent.

Wouldn't

> > touch the " I can't believe... " if they paid me to!

> >

> > Corn syrup is not a food IMH but you're right there. Though

> white

> > rice, white bread is probably a step above eating cardboard,

> > probably more palatable but way more toxic I'm sure...

> >

> > , Diamond Dog

> > <diamonddog@g...> wrote:

> > > >A Jasmine rice (though it's white and nothing worse for the

> > body, I'd

> > > rather have meat >personally as long as it's organic) and

> one for

> > the veggies,

> > >

> > > I'm betting that it's not the worst food for one's body, eaten

in

> > > moderation. Milk, butter, corn syrup, and a lot of other

things

> > are far

> > > worse to my knowledge.

> > >

> > > Veronica

> > >

December 10, 2004

, " Pete " <nakeddragon@i...>

wrote:

>

> But are we not the only animal that drinks milk once weened off

our Mother, there has to be a thought in there somewhere.

Yes, that the thought that's been rehashed over and over again by

people who are brainwashed into this subculture of fear and cannot

stop to think for themselves because the fear is too great. And in

this list of people I do include myself back in those days. Belief

is a powerful thing. Once I bought into the lie, my denial was to

great to see the logic of God (or call it nature for those who don't

abide by any type of spirituality)having made cows with an

overabundance of milk production, much more than their calves could

use. If God is Intelligence, then it knew what It was doing. Of

course, the way that cows are raised nowadays, they're a certain

abuse all in the name of greed and capitalism, hence the use of

hormones and antibiotics. That is NOT what God intended.

> Just out of curiousity, when you weren't drinking milk were you

also making sure you were getting the protien and other possible

nutrients found in milk from other sources?

A very good point. Yet even today, when I eat a very balanced diet

with protein, I never feel as good as when I, at the very least,

drink milk & eat cottage cheese.

>If i was female, or my wife, had just given birth only to have the

baby taken away and someone come along and start expressing the

breast milk against ones will, well I could not imagine it being an

experience as nature had intended...

ROTF LOL!!! That is SOOOO funny Pete!!! Yeah, unless your wife were

a ZZZZZZ cup size, then we could debate whether God intended her for

milking purposes. (Or her plastic surgeon!) ;o)

FYI: just because someone publishes an article doesn't give it its

facts any credibility. No more than what comes out of the FDA who

approves killer drugs and poisonous foods every single day. As long

as they make money, who cares if we die, right?

Look the bottom line is this: every one has their own path. If

drinking milk is bad for you then so be it. It doesn't mean it's bad

for me or anyone else. I'm not saying milk is for everybody, esp.

lactose intolerant individuals. The problem IS tolerance: being able

to accept other people for (or in spite of) their differences. But

once a (false) belief is accepted, such as when I ERRONEOUSLY

believed milk was bad for me, it is extremely hard to see over the

denial. It's much easier to get angry while reading what I just

wrote if it doesn't agree with your belief system, right? Yet the

key to ultimate transcendence is to know the truth. And the truth is

a belief is just a belief and nothing more. But once accepted that

belief will be proven right by one subconscious mind over and over

again because that is the nature of the subconscious. So for me it

is important to only accept beliefs that work for me. IF being a

vegeatarian and avoiding milk is what works that's what I will do.

But if I introduced milk in my diet and felt instantly brought back

to life, so to speak, well... that's when the wool was pulled from

my eyes and my denial had to go.

I wish you peace and awarness.

S1H

PS: I stopped feeling guilty over eating animals when I saw a

program on Discovery (or Animal Planet) about animals eating their

own progeny and I realized how truly vicious animals can really be.

(Even Dolphins, really blew me away!)So why should I experience a

misplaced self-destructing emotion (guilt)over eating meat which is

good for me (emphasison " ME " , again, may not be for everyone but the

only research I've done is trial and error with my own body & diet

and I finally found what works for me...)when animals don't think

twice about being cruel (human perception and judgement here) and

eating other animals including their young?

December 11, 2004

Er, why tuck this down in a postscript? Surely that's the point you are trying

to

make to vegetarians? - That it's okay to torture and to kill our fellow

creatures

because some animals in the wild kill? We've heard it all before, sadly. It's

ill

thought out. And, I am going to add, it is insulting.

Pat

> PS: I stopped feeling guilty over eating animals when I saw a

> program on Discovery (or Animal Planet) about animals eating their

> own progeny and I realized how truly vicious animals can really be.

> (Even Dolphins, really blew me away!)So why should I experience a

> misplaced self-destructing emotion (guilt)over eating meat which is

> good for me (emphasison " ME " , again, may not be for everyone but the

> only research I've done is trial and error with my own body & diet

> and I finally found what works for me...)when animals don't think

> twice about being cruel (human perception and judgement here) and

> eating other animals including their young?

December 11, 2004

-

spirit1hawk

Saturday, December 11, 2004 2:57 PM

Re: white rice vs. milk etc..

I don't see any fear in a realisation that one does not need to consume milk to

be fit and healthy. I'm not sure the type of vego's you have been associating

with but fear isn't the motivating element behind the choices made by those I

know. Rather it is made out of respect for the animals, not from fear of eating

them. If there was any fear to be felt it would be in not eating animals in a

society where the large portion of people see eating animals as the norm.

Not all spirituality uses the word 'God'.

You speak of ultimate transendance being the truth, but truth isn't something

you decide is truth simply because you choose to believe it is so. That is

illusion, as is your definition of belief.

Pete...

http://www.primalvision.net

" There is a vitality, a life force, an energy, a quickening, that is translated

through you into action, and because there is only one of you in all time, this

expression is unique. And if you block it, it will never exist through any

other medium and will be lost " - Martha Graham

December 11, 2004

TOUCHE!!

I don't see any fear in a realisation that one does not need to consume milk

to be fit and healthy. I'm not sure the type of vego's you have been associating

with but fear isn't the motivating element behind the choices made by those I

know. Rather it is made out of respect for the animals, not from fear of eating

them. If there was any fear to be felt it would be in not eating animals in a

society where the large portion of people see eating animals as the norm.

December 11, 2004

>

>PS: I stopped feeling guilty over eating animals when I saw a

>program on Discovery (or Animal Planet) about animals eating their

>own progeny

I think you may be misconstruing the reasons behind this behavior. It is

common in rodents (I run a rodent rescue, so I have a lot of experience

with them) and usually this comes either from:

a) when the mother feels her litter has been threatened. Some fates are

worse than death, killing her young may be more humane.

b) an animal dies and they need to clean the nest of the animal's body

(esp. common in mice).

I don't think either of these scenarios is vicious.

> and I realized how truly vicious animals can really be.

And by the same note, it's great argument for eating humans!

>(Even Dolphins, really blew me away!)So why should I experience a

>misplaced self-destructing emotion (guilt)over eating meat

Guilt is not what I feel about eating meat. Buddhism says we should not

have guilt, we can only try to rectify the situation as best we can and

make sure it doesn't happen again. That is what I have done. So, no

negative emotions here.

> which is

>good for me (emphasison " ME " ,

Why on a veg list then? You're welcome here certainly, but if you're really

into meat and dairy...what inspired joining?

Veronica

December 11, 2004

>

>Not all spirituality uses the word 'God'.

Indeed. God as the name of a deity is a Judeo-Christian construct.

Veronica

December 12, 2004

At least animals who are preyed upon in the wild have a chance to escape!

psybermus <psybermus wrote: