RAW-FOOD Archives

Raw Food Diet Support List

RAW-FOOD@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Martha Seagoe <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 05 Dec 1996 12:47:11 -0800
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (96 lines)
>>> Nieft / Secola <[log in to unmask]> 12/04/96 03:25pm >>>
>>(snip) ... my (un)notions of philosophy, spiritualism, religion (as well as
>>>I'm a guy, who for deep-seated reasons was pretty
>>>much into intellect stuff, figuring it out, making sense of it all...
>>No need to explain this away.  I know I'm like this, and from what I'm
>>reading here, most of the people on this list are like this.

>You missed the point. I -was- like that, primarily.

No, I got it that you were talking about past tense.  What I was
responding to was your qualifying "for deep-seated reasons."

>>>Moral codes are useful or not, but they aren't Right or Wrong.

>Most people don't and that's fine fine fine (until they start shooting me,
>or blasting me on veg-raw:) for not living up to their version of Right and
>Wrong...)

Was I doing this?  Didn't mean to.  My only intent is to express my
perspective, like everyone else has been doing.  Kind of like, "hey, I'm
here too, see me?"

(snip stuff about whether we are only a collection of our molecules)

(also snip stuff about whether we're trying to change anybody's minds)

>>I'm sorry you feel this way because I'm really grappling with this issue.
>> I feel as if I'm coming to a crossroads and am frozen because I don't
>>know which way to go.

>Maybe there is no solution to the issue as formulated. So the high road
>stuff is getting stale to me. Big wow. I trust your thawing in whatever
>direction doesn't need my commentary to be useful.

OK so maybe I got a little carried away.  I was probably relating more to
my perception of Peter's dilemma than my own.  I am probably years
away from actually facing the issue.  I'm not even completely vegan yet,
much less all raw.  But, I do tend to try to figure things out, the "right"
way or "best" way, and I guess my nose is a little out of joint when
someone dismisses a subject so near to my heart as boring or unworthy
of him or simply tired out.

>>(snip)  What I don't like is violence.

>Then you don't "like" nature which is full of violence and your efforts to
>be "natural" (if that is what you are trying to be) may be frustrating at
>best and full of denial and self-contempt at worst. Starting to sound like
>Peter here, eh?

So Kirt, are you saying that you *like* violence?
Anyway, you're right about the frustration, to the extent that I let it bother
me.  I pretty much accept what goes on as the bad I have to take along
with the good.  So I don't like nature, but I also do like nature.
Yeah, you're sounding a little like Peter, but that's OK.  Peter makes good
sense (IMHO).

>>I think I said frighten because you said of Zephyr's earlier post that it
>>was so hostile, and yet you don't find the NFL posts hostile.  (snip)...

Ah yes.  I *asked* Zephyr if he was hostile, because I don't trust my
ability to discern mood over the internet.  As it says on my Internet for
Dummies, page 88, "E-mail always seems ruder than it's supposed to."
And here's hoping I don't get zinged for copyright infringement.
But as to why Zephyr and not NFL....  Zephyr was apparently replying to
a discussion in which I was involved, and I wanted to reply to the
content of his post anyway.  NFL has not posted anything to which I've
felt inclined to reply *to the content*.  If I went around pointing out hostility
everywhere I think I see it, there'd be a lot more posts from me than
you've already been seeing!  One thing about the tree three, they don't do
much to support the theory that veganism engenders a peaceful nature.
:-(

>>(snip most of fictional dialogue)
>>at least no more land will have to be destroyed.  And maybe even
>>some can be recovered.  We need to control our population.

>The logical conclusion of a deep ecology stance is murder and/or
>suicide. I have an instinct against such behavior at present. :)
???  I was thinking more of birth control.

>KN: Wanna play frisbee?
>MS: Sure, but isn't that frisbee made of plastic.
>KN: Yes, and unrecyclable plastic, as well. But its the best excuse for
>plastic I've ever come across.
>MS: OK, but just for a little while, I've gotta get home to see if any new
>veg-raw posts came through.
>KN: Me too. It's really been cutting into my frisbee time lately.

Is this your way of saying we need to get lives?     :-)

(snip bunches of stuff, including adolescent humor)

Cheers 2,
Martha


ATOM RSS1 RSS2