Lets go over some basics.

Originally posted by karoly aczel
Forget the 2 months to go. You can keep posting when you are not a sub.

Why should he if he doesn't want to? Dasa never seems to want to engage anyone in any genuine discussion. Now he's said he wants to go. Why should what you want trump what he wants?

Originally posted by karoly aczel
Forget the 2 months to go. You can keep posting when you are not a sub.
Rather read all the responses here on this thread and think how you may meet ALL of them halfway and possibly have a dialogue that goes beyond "I'm right , you're wrong".

If you cant see this then 2 millenia will not be enough to get through to anyone on here.

I have 2 months to go....and I am not going to respond to persons who are not truthful, for they only waste my time with their whimsical rejection of everything that is before them.

A good example is this.......many are defending animal cruelty, and with this type of untruthful approach to spirituality, how could I discuss anything at all with that person.....(they are not truthful) and any discussion would be a farce.

So like I said before, I will not be responding to abusive,manipulative, slanderous, baiting, straw man comments.

I responded to your comment because you just asked a straight forward no nonsense question......and from my past experience with you, you are not playing mind games like most people are.

Originally posted by Dasa
many are defending animal cruelty, and with this type of untruthful approach to spirituality, how could I discuss anything at all with that person.....(they are not truthful) and any discussion would be a farce.

Many are "defending animal cruelty"? Who for example? I myself do not defend animal cruelty. I can't think of anyone else who does. Many people have explicitly condemned it. Including myself - a condemnation that you accepted, if I recall correctly. Straight forward question: People "defending animal cruelty"? Who are you referring to?

Come on Dasa. Here is your chance to discuss "animal cruelty", vegetarianism and spirituality. Don't shy away from it. This is a forum. Just ignoring and/or insulting people whose belief systems are different from yours has not served you well for the last 10 months. Why not engage people? Why not set a major debate on eating meat, "animal cruelty" and spirituality in motion?

Originally posted by Dasa
I have 2 months to go....and I am not going to respond to persons who are not truthful, for they only waste my time with their whimsical rejection of everything that is before them.

A good example is this.......many are defending animal cruelty, and with this type of untruthful approach to spirituality, how could I discuss anything at all with that person... ...[text shortened]... ......and from my past experience with you, you are not playing mind games like most people are.

I have been struggling to decide if you are a 3a, a troll or in fact just what you appear to be on the surface i.e. a sincere but unbalanced individual with no understanding of the human condition outside of what you have been brainwashed to believe.

This forum contains a spectrum of attitudes and belief systems, although many cultural voices are missing. There are many arguments (sometimes heated) and all sides at time fail to recognise the other person’s position. The gulf between atheism and theism cannot be breached any more than the gulf between many religions, but most here want to do so and that desire is driven by the recognition that if we do not try then we are doomed or at least stuck in our own sectarianism and isolation. It is what makes the forum live and keeps debate alive.

However you do not try to breach the gap - you just rock up everyday and copy/paste someone else's ideas, proclaim them as your own, demand that they are accepted and denounce anyone who refuses to or can’t, with insults and disdain. If you cannot see why this alienates you then you are indeed either a troll or, and I'm sorry to say it, slightly dense.

Originally posted by Dasa
many are defending animal cruelty [here]

I say 'no one defends animal cruelty here'. You say 'many are defending animal cruelty'. Give us some examples.

Dasa, if you got killed instantly, in a head-on car collision, would you call it 'animal cruelty'?

Cruelty, by definition means intended abuse.

As for breeding animals for slaughter, which they know little about at the time of death, in order for a higher developed 'human' animal to pursue its own life goals; would you also call that 'cruelty'?

There is no abuse in cattle breeding for slaughter. It is intrinsically natural for 'human animal' to do so, being disposed of a position to also do so. The animals know nothing of the head-on collision. Same as your possible death in a car, also disposed of manufactured 'human animal' design.

Get the point? ?

-m.

Originally posted by mikelom
Dasa, if you got killed instantly, in a head-on car collision, would you call it 'animal cruelty'?

Cruelty, by definition means intended abuse.

As for breeding animals for slaughter, which they know little about at the time of death, in order for a higher developed 'human' animal to pursue its own life goals; would you also call that 'cruelty'?

Ther ...[text shortened]... a car, also disposed of manufactured 'human animal' design.

Get the point? ?

-m.

Indeed. "Cruelty" is causing unnecessary suffering. As far as I know, no one here condones "cruelty" and yet Dasa is claiming that "many" do. He seems reluctant to substantiate his claim. Personally I think he is simply using the word "cruelty" mistakenly.

I think he is also missusing the words "defending" and "many"

Originally posted by mikelom
Dasa, if you got killed instantly, in a head-on car collision, would you call it 'animal cruelty'?

Cruelty, by definition means intended abuse.

As for breeding animals for slaughter, which they know little about at the time of death, in order for a higher developed 'human' animal to pursue its own life goals; would you also call that 'cruelty'?

Ther ...[text shortened]... a car, also disposed of manufactured 'human animal' design.

Get the point? ?

-m.

Chickens are kept in small cages and force fed, 30 pigs are kept in a pen 5 mt x 5 mt,.....cows sense the death in the slaughter house and become fearful, and the hydraulic bolt that is put to their head does not always kill instantly.

Everyone is missing the point, its just not animal suffering but.......the following understanding.

Spiritual realization develops in the person a sensibility that is aware of the spiritual nature of all living things, and it is with this realization that they respect that every living thing has the birth given right to live....and not be killed.

If someone is an atheist and they falsely accept everything is just chemical....then let them kill everything that moves, because they will anyhow, and they will return to this world and they will also be killed in the same manner as their karma dictates.

But for the person living the spiritual life and who has higher transcendental knowledge and realization....they never partake in meat eating and the killing that goes with it.....because it goes against their spiritual sense-ability.......and their spiritual love goes out to all creatures big and small.

Eating meat and supporting animal slaughter, is a declaration that their spirituality is not working for them and is worthless.

.................

Besides all that...

Meat eating and the subsequent raising of animals for slaughter is an economic disaster....because everyone knows that 100 acres of land can feed 10 times more people that 100 acres of land for raising animals fore slaughter...... its criminal even on the economic platform.

Originally posted by Dasa
Besides all that...Meat eating and the subsequent raising of animals for slaughter is an economic disaster....

What evidence do you have for this claim? You may use anything from the dawn of recorded human history in your response.

Originally posted by FMF
Why should he if he doesn't want to? Dasa never seems to want to engage anyone in any genuine discussion. Now he's said he wants to go. Why should what you want trump what he wants?

I'm saying forget the two months, He can leave now

Originally posted by Dasa
I have 2 months to go....and I am not going to respond to persons who are not truthful, for they only waste my time with their whimsical rejection of everything that is before them.

A good example is this.......many are defending animal cruelty, and with this type of untruthful approach to spirituality, how could I discuss anything at all with that person... ...[text shortened]... ......and from my past experience with you, you are not playing mind games like most people are.

Ok, good luck Dasa.

Originally posted by karoly aczel
Ok, good luck Dasa.

Save your farewells KA, he isn't going anywhere.

Originally posted by Dasa
Eating meat and supporting animal slaughter, is a declaration that their spirituality is not working for them and is worthless.

My support for killing animals for food "declares" nothing of the sort. You are being presumptuous.