: Hoarding, Karen? That's your characterization of exactly what? Meat eating in general? Deep freezers? Grocery stores? Mine and many others. Please speak to a physician for further details about recommended healthy protien consumption. Don't take my word for it. It is quite obvious that a majority of meat eating people in western culture are eating more than needed. What gives me this idea? Supply & demand.
: Overconsume? Sure! You can do too much of anything. Water, soy products, celery. There is an immmoral component to anything which is done to excess. Meat is not the basis for your indignation here - only gluttony. I agree with that.
YOU asked specifically about the homo-meat eating position, not about water, soy, etc. These require much less energy and pollution and resource depletion to provide for the masses. If for no other reason, practicality should appeal to a conservative like you.
: Profit, Karen? I think we found a needle in your haystack. If we have no right to profit on meat we have no right to profit on vegetables or anything else.
Hmm.. Celery slaughter houses, oh cruel torture, evil gotten gain. The line has been crossed in the meat industry. Like I said before, back in the day farmers provided for their family and generaly ate small amounts of meat. If you have faith and love and God, why do you need profit above and beyand? Sounds like hypocrisy to me.
: When was the last time you saw a wolf perform one (old hat, I know)?
I have more respect for the animal who does not need one than one who has to perform one.
: But to answer your point (which I wish you would do on every salient point I make), there are not nearly so many triple by-passes as there are those who eat meat. Exercise, moderation of diet, and healthy habits are going to save you from the surgeon - not meat abstainence.
Well according to the doctor, meat eating is not A HEALTHY LIFE STYLE.
: So what you really abhor is the specialization of man. Technology is the culprit. The evil (moral judgement) is the corral vs. the range. I'm glossing over nothing. You guys have nothing but emotion to argue a point with. If I hunt all my food without the use of a gun - just my bare hands and wits like the wolf - are you OK with meat eating, Karen? I know you're not. If we free range all our chickens and cows are you happier for them and their impending doom? I think not!
Think again. Of course i'm happier. I recommend free range meat to people quite often. If humans were not so short sited and ignorant about meat consumption I venture to say alot of the things that bother me about it could be avoided, such as the destruction of other animals habitats, which(once again) just comes back to bite us in the ass in the end anyway. Many are surprised to learn how most fast food meat is aquired. Not in the US... If you hunted your meat in the wolf way it is very likely you would eat much less than you may eat now. You would feel better, and so would your potential prey-hehehe. There is nothing less emotional than religion, IMHO. I sure do like the 'do unto others' concept myself. It seems rather common sense.
: I'm afraid that your emotion based position will eventually be codified into law.
I don't think that will happen in our life times. Do you seriously think it could? McDonalds mongers everywhere would rise from there TV sets and revolt!
: That trivializes a great many brilliant minds, Karen. My positions of biblical theology are well studied and quite well accepted among great numbers of respected scholars dating back centuries. Your statement suggesting that Jesus was humble borrowed a holy and redeeming facet of the prophecied Messiah in order to suboordinate it to suit your agenda - to help you win a quite trivial argument by comparison.
Dose of your own medicine does not seem to taste well to you. You have said many things which have been interpreted by others here to trivialize other brilliant minds. Everyone has their own interpretation of the bible and it's scriptures, even the same person does at different times in their lives. Then there are others that reject it completely. My problem only lies with those who get self righteous, regardless of their beliefs. My interpretation of Jesus is just as valid as yours even though you choose to belittle it because it does not agree with yours. Christians don't have a lease on him. Many people believe he existed and was a wonderful man, as do I, yet not as you do.
: I was pointing out the downside to loyalty.
Which is becoming communist?
: I'm sad that you would boil down Christianty only to find the above mentioned elements. It illustrates how you dismiss this vastly large group of people by decrying thier monolithic thinking. Doing this allows you to escape, ditch out of responsibility, and make excuses for your rejection of the biblical Christ.
HA! You go too far. Quite a reach on that one. Did I hit a nerve or what. I have great respect for people of all religions. I specifically disagreed with one of your concepts, by no means with christianity as a whole. Your words in my mouth. IMHO, christian values are generally about being kind, loving and responsible, not about living it up because all guilt has been taken care of for you. This type of thinking could lead to anarchy. Perhaps you misunderstood me. Christians share many moral beliefs with thousands of other religions and then some. It is not exclusive.
: I respect those who do live their convictions. Good for you. I don't agree with your convictions, of course, but at least you weren't driven to the U.N. conference on global warming in a limo.
: That's not true, Karen. One verse of scripture taken out of context is
: generally used to suboordinated God to the desires or wants of the person doing it. It required numerous scriptures to support a specific idea before basic Christian doctrines were established. These doctrines are widely held and common among the various Christian denominations. They may disagree with peripheral details but the deity of Christ is a basic Christian concept that is not arguable - unless you would disregard the many scriptures that support the doctrine. If you wish to suggest that my interpretation of scripture is esoteric, please provide me with an alternative explanation to the John reference provided in the previous post. This is the part of the post that I think you glossed over. It certainly is the part of Christanity that disbelieving people find most troubling. I suggest it is the best aspect of Christianity and the most illustrative of God's love for you and I.
: Stuart Gort
Sorry if you find me glossing. Please go into to your John point at more length.
Most scripture is taken out of context in the manner you suggest. I've heard it done in church for years and years.
None.
