Friends,
I wanted to respond to Joyce's thoughtful post as I haven't checked this forum too much lately and I did just notice that no one had responded to her questions yet.
Some of the things that she raises are common topics of discussion in regards to vegetarianism.
Here is her message;
Quote:
So, I have another question that is very related to the issue of slaughtering animals. this has been unresolved for me for several years. Studies have demonstrated that plants "scream" inaudibly when their leaves are torn from them. On monitoring equipment, they even register off the chart "screaming" when another plant nearby is "murdered," and then again repeatedly when the "murderer" simply enters the room. When the same kind of equipment is monitoring humans it shows a similar pattern when the human experiences terror or severe panic. I wonder how this is different from the killing of animals?
As we all probably are aware everything has a vibration and consciousness. The equipment used in these studies measures vibration and on some level consciousness. So one could say that if we had more sensitive equipment for measuring these types of energies then we could likely measure the vibration of a rock.
The difference between plants and animals is clear. Plants do not have a nervous system that feels pain. Animals do. Plants do not have a heart and other internal organs. Animals do. Plants do not have eyes. Animals do. It goes on and on.
I don't think that you can really compare the suffering of plants with the suffering of animals on the same level. This is a commonly used argument that people bring up when they want to try and justify their own eating of flesh to someone who is vegetarian. I have encountered this a couple hundred times in the 18 years I have been vegan.
Quote:
When a leaf or a limb is cut from a tree, the plant "bleeds" and creates a "scab" to protect the wound. I once went to my yard to remove a few very small trees that were growing directly under an electrical line. Their growth there would cause major problems later on. I distintly "heard" (more like felt) the trees telling me, "NO. We want to live HERE. We'll try to avoid the electrical lines but if we fail, we'd rather be severely timmed later than be killed or moved now."
All living things have some way of repairing or healing themselves after injury. I don't think you can say that the liquid "bleeds". If used in the same context as human/animal blood then it doesn't work. Blood has to be a substance that moves through the entire body but begins and ends at the heart. Since plants don't have an actual heart organ it follows that they can't have blood.
What is happening is that the lignin which binds plants together is being secreted out of the cut or hole in the plant to 'patch' it up. This is a natural defense mechanism against the plant drying up and dying. Humans on the other hand don't secret blood when they are dying. The blood needs to stay in the body, not go outside of it.
Quote:
I think the key message from Anastasia is "relationship" to nature, and to eat only that which is freely given. I eat wild food growing on my property and some cultivated food growing on my property, but as I walk around to harvest, I often feel a plant letting me know that it is not for eating, or at least that it is not for me to eat at that time.
A friend of mine is a hunter and every time he hunts he speaks to the spirit of the animals he is hunting. He thanks them for all the good they do and their beauty and contribution to life, then requests that if it benefits the herd or the group for one of them to be taken for food, that they send that one to him. He does not track the animals but simply waits in one spot. Most years an animal comes to him but not always. This is similar to how some of the Native Americans hunted (not all by any means). It was about an honoring and mutually supportive relationship.
Eat that which is freely given. Yes that is the logic presented in the books in my opinion. I do find it very hard to believe that any animal under any circumstance wants to be slaughtered for food unless the person or family is actually starving.
I don't think just because someone likes the taste of venison that it justifies them killing a deer even if that deer supposedly 'speaks to them' and says it is OK.
In my opinion, only people who are starving and have nothing else to eat are somewhat justified in killing animals for food. But the problem is that probably 95% (just guessing here) of the population can get fruits and vegetables for food or they have the land that they could be growing their own food but aren't. Yes I know there are lots of people starving around the planet who are eating animals but if they took the land that was used to grow the food for the animals and for grazing and converted it to land that grew fruits and vegetables they could stop eating meat. Of course this will take some time and effort as now most of this land has been overgrazed and plants have a hard time growing there.
Quote:
Those experiences seem to suggest that even vegetarianism that is supported by food purchased by "business" farmers (organic or chemical) is somewhat harmful to the plants harvested and therefore to those eating the plants. That is born out by the results of vegetarian diets. Vegans do not necessarily live longer or healthier. Yes, many of them do, but so do many meat eaters.
It is all about making the best choices all the time. That is our work now.
If you have a choice between eating factory farmed produce or factory farmed animals which do you eat? Well you eat the healthier one of course. That obviously is the produce.
If you have a choice between eating biodynamically grown produce or biodynamically raised animals which do you eat? Again the produce is much healthier.
There are countless studies that show a healthy vegan and / or vegetarian diet will help you live longer and healthier. I can cite study after study. There are no studies that I am aware of that say meat eaters live longer and healthier lives than their vegetarian or vegan counterparts.
Quote:
My husband's grandfather died five years ago at 102 years old. No one could ever remember a day when he was sick. He retired from three different careers. In the last three years of his life he entered his own "private space" in his mind but he remained happy and active, interacting with others in a beneficial way. He ate "slaughtered and abused" meat several times every day of his life.
I very much want the animal abuses to end. I support that wholeheartedly. I also support a clear understanding of what is the true benefit to us regarding food. I think those two issues have not yet been clearly and effectively separated out. And without that understanding, we may succeed in ending the abuse of animals and still fail to gain the full and rich potential of being human in relationship with all of Nature that is available to us.
The grandfather probably ate meat that was not raised commercially for most of his life. Since factory farming is a relatively new concept I would guess that in this persons early years, the important ones that set you up physically for the rest of your life, he ate only meat that was raised on a farm by someone he knew or by himself.
That is a whole world different than todays meat raised in factory farms.
I think Anastasia makes it abundantly clear, especially in book 6 and then later in the chapter entitled 'Divine Nutrition' how we should be eating. For me this is crystal clear. There is no room to even argue with her on this one.
Blessings,
Christopher
Login
Register
FAQ
Search
) when even thinking of seeing meat. For example, my mom got me a cheeseburger and I felt very queasy looking at it. This happens all the time, so I doubt I will be eating any meat soon.