*** WHY HINDUS DON'T EAT MEAT ***
or www.mantra.com/jai
Besides being an expression of compassion
for animals, vegetarianism is followed for
ecological and health rationales
REASONS
In the past fifty years, millions of meat-eaters --
Hindus and non-Hindus -- have made the personal decision
to stop eating the flesh of other creatures. There are
five major motivations for such a decision:
1. The Dharmic Law Reason
Ahinsa, the law of noninjury, is the Hindu's first
duty in fulfilling religious obligations to God and God's
creation as defined by Vedic scripture.
2. The Karmic Consequences Reason
All of our actions, including our choice of food,
have Karmic consequences. By involving oneself in the
cycle of inflicting injury, pain and death, even
indirectly by eating other creatures, one must in the
future experience in equal measure the suffering caused.
3. The Spiritual Reason
Food is the source of the body's chemistry, and what
we ingest affects our consciousnes, emotions and
experiential patterns. If one wants to live in higher
consciousness, in peace and happiness and love for all
creatures, then he cannot eat meat, fish, shellfish, fowl
or eggs. By ingesting the grosser chemistries of animal
foods, one introduces into the body and mind anger,
jealousy, anxiety, suspicion and a terrible fear of
death, all of which are locked into the the flesh of the
butchered creatures. For these reasons, vegetarians live
in higher consciousness and meat-eaters abide in lower
consciousness.
4. The Health Reason
Medical studies prove that a vegetarian diet is
easier to digest, provides a wider ranger of nutrients
and imposes fewer burdens and impurities on the body.
Vegetarians are less susceptible to all the major
diseases that afflict contemporary humanity, and thus
live longer, healthier, more productive lives. They have
fewer physical complaints, less frequent visits to the
doctor, fewer dental problems and smaller medical bills.
Their immune system is stronger, their bodies are purer,
more refined and skin more beautiful.
5. The Ecological Reason
Planet Earth is suffereing. In large measure, the
escalating loss of species, destruction of ancient
rainforests to create pasture lands for live stock, loss
of topsoils and the consequent increase of water
impurities and air pollution have all been traced to the
single fact of meat in the human diet. No decision that
we can make as individuals or as a race can have such a
dramatic effect on the improvement of our planetary
ecology as the decision not to eat meat.
HISTORY
The book FOOD FOR THE SPIRIT, VEGETARIANISM AND THE WORLD
RELIGIONS, observes, "Despite popular knowledge of meat-
eating's adverse effects, the nonvegetarian diet became
increasingly widespread among the Hindus after the two
major invasions by foreign powers, first the Muslims and
later the British. With them came the desire to be
'civilized,' to eat as did the Saheeb. Those atually
trained in Vedic knowledge, however, never adopted a
meat-oriented diet, and the pious Hindu still observes
vegetarian principles as a matter of religious duty.
"That vegetarianism has always been widespread in
India is clear from the earliest Vedic texts. This was
observed by the ancient traveler Megasthenes and also by
Fa-Hsien, a Chinese Buddhist monk who, in the fifth
century, traveled to India in order to obtain authentic
copies of the scriptures.
"These scriptures unambiguously support the meatless
way of life. In the MAHABHARAT, for instance, the great
warrior Bheeshm explains to Yuddhishtira, eldest of the
Paandav princes, that the meat of animals is like the
flesh of one's own son. Similarly, the MANUSMRITI
declares that one should 'refrain from eating all kinds
of meat,' for such eating involves killing and and leads
to Karmic bondage (Bandh) [5.49]. Elsewhere in the Vedic
literature, the last of the great Vedic kings, Maharaja
Parikshit, is quoted as saying that 'only the animal-
killer cannot relish the message of the Absolute Truth
[Shrimad Bhagvatam 10.1.4].'"
SCRIPTURE
He who desires to augment his own flesh by eating
the flesh of other creatures lives in misery in whatever
species he may take his birth.
MAHABHARAT 115.47
Those high-souled persons who desire beauty,
faultlessness of limbs, long life, understanding, mental
and physical strength and memory should abstain from acts
of injury. MAHABHARAT 18.115.8
The very name of cow is Aghnya ["not to be killed"],
indicating that they should never be slaughtered. Who,
then could slay them? Surely, one who kills a cow or a
bull commits a heinous crime. MAHABHARAT, SHANTIPARV
262.47
The purchaser of flesh performs Hinsa (violence) by
his wealth; he who eats flesh does so by enjoying its
taste; the killer does Hinsa by actually tying and
killing the animal. Thus, there are three forms of
killing: he who brings flesh or sends for it, he who cuts
off the limbs of an animal, and he who purchases, sells
or cooks flesh and eats it -- all of these are to be
considered meat-eaters. MAHABHARAT, ANU 115.40
He who sees that the Lord of all is ever the same
in all that is -- immortal in the field of mortality --
he sees the truth. And when a man sees that the God in
himself is the same God in all that is, he hurts not
himself by hurting others. Then he goes, indeed, to the
highest path. BHAGVAD GEETA 13.27-28
Ahinsa is the highest Dharm. Ahinsa is the best
Tapas. Ahinsa is the greatest gift. Ahinsa is the
highest self-control. Ahinsa is the highest sacrifice.
Ahinsa is the highest power. Ahinsa is the highest
friend. Ahinsa is the highest truth. Ahinsa is the
highest teaching. MAHABHARAT 18.116.37-41
What is the good way? It is the path that reflects
on how it may avoid killing any creature. TIRUKURAL 324
All that lives will press palms together in
prayerful adoration of those who refuse to slaughter and
savor meat. TIRUKURAL 260
What is virtuous conduct? It is never destroting
life, for killing leads to every other sin. TIRUKURAL
312, 321
Goodness is never one with the minds of these two:
one who wields a weapon and one who feasts on a
creature's flesh. TIRUKURAL 253
Copyright (C) 1993, Himalayan Academy, All Rights
Reserved. The information contained in this news report
may not be republished in any form without the prior
written authority of Himalayan Academy.
This is an authorized reproduction.
Vegetarianism: Recommended in Vedic Scripture
By Stephen Knapp
http://www.stephen-knapp.com
Many times there seems to be some confusion or lack of
clarity on whether the Vedic path condones or condemns
the eating of meat. Often times I hear Indians and
followers of the Vedic path explain that meat eating is
all right, that the Vedic shastras do not condemn it. Of
course, in this day and age meat eating includes and
supports the whole meat industry, which is the systematic
slaughter of thousands of animals on a daily basis. But
if we actually research the Vedic texts we will find that
there are numerous references in the various portions of
the Vedic literature which explain in no uncertain terms
the karmic dangers of meat-eating and unnecessary animal
slaughter. These indicate that meat eating should be
given up for one's spiritual and even material progress.
This means that the Vedic conclusions that some people
present for meat-eating are not accurate, and that they
have never studied their own religious books very
thoroughly. This is something that is important to
understand, so let us take a look.
VEDIC REFERENCES AGAINST MEAT-EATING AND ANIMAL SLAUGHTER
To start with, the Manu-samhita clearly and logically
recommends that, "Meat can never be obtained without
injury to living creatures, and injury to sentient beings
is detrimental to the attainment of heavenly bliss; let
him therefore shun the use of meat. Having well
considered the disgusting origin of flesh and the cruelty
of fettering and slaying corporeal beings, let him
entirely abstain from eating flesh." (Manu-samhita 5.48-
49)
However, it is not simply the person who eats the meat
that becomes implicated by eating the dead animal, but
also those who assist in the process. "He who permits the
slaughter of an animal, he who cuts it up, he who kills
it, he who buys or sells meat, he who cooks it, he who
serves it up, and he who eats it, must all be considered
as the slayers of the animal. There is no greater sinner
than that man who though not worshiping the gods or the
ancestors, seeks to increase the bulk of his own flesh by
the flesh of other beings." (Manu-samhita 5.51-52)
As we get further into the Manu-samhita, there are
warnings that become increasingly more serious. For
example, "If he has a strong desire (for meat) he may
make an animal of clarified butter or one of flour (and
eat that); but let him never seek to destroy an animal
without a (lawful) reason. As many hairs as the slain
beast has, so often indeed will he who killed it without
a (lawful) reason suffer a violent death in future
births." (Manu-samhita 5.37-38)
In this way, the only time to carry out the need to kill
animals for consumption is when there is an emergency
such as when there simply is nothing else to eat.
Otherwise, when there are plenty of grains, vegetables,
fruits, etc., to eat, it is only mankind's lust and
selfish desires that motivate one to kill other beings to
satisfy one's tongue by tasting their blood and flesh, or
to fatten one's wallet by making money from participating
in the distribution or the cooking of meat. Such violent
actions create opposite reactions. For this reason the
warnings are given, "He who injures harmless creatures
from a wish to give himself pleasure, never finds
happiness in this life or the next." (Manu-samhita 5.45)
'Nonetheless, there are also benefits that are mentioned
that a person can attain simply by not eating the bodies
of other creatures: "By subsisting on pure fruits and
roots, and by eating food fit for ascetics in the forest,
one does not gain so great a reward as by entirely
avoiding the use of flesh. Me he [mam sah] will devour in
the next world, whose flesh I eat in this life; the wise
declare this to be the real meaning of the word 'flesh'
[mam sah]." (Manu-samhita 5.54-55)
"He who does not seek to cause the sufferings of bonds
and death to living creatures, (but) desires the good of
all (beings), obtains endless bliss. He who does not
injure any (creature) attains without an effort what he
thinks of, what he undertakes, and what he fixes his mind
on." (Manu-samhita 5.46-47)
'Also, "By not killing any living being, one becomes fit
for salvation." (Manu-samhita 6.60)
'The earlier texts, such as the Rig-veda (10.87.16), also
proclaim the need to give up the eating of slaughtered
animals. "One who partakes of human flesh, the flesh of a
horse or of another animal, and deprives others of milk
by slaughtering cows, O King, if such a fiend does not
desist by other means, then you should not hesitate to
cut off his head."
'"You must not use your God-given body for killing God's
creatures, whether they are human, animal or whatever."
(Yajur Veda 12.32.90)
'There are also references in the Mahabharat that
forewarn the activity of eating flesh: "He who desires to
augment his own flesh by eating the flesh of other
creatures, lives in misery in whatever species he may
take his [next] birth." (Mahabharat, Anu.115.47)
'"The purchaser of flesh performs violence by his wealth;
he who eats flesh does so by enjoying its taste; the
killer does violence by actually tying and killing the
animal. Thus, there are three forms of killing. He who
brings flesh or sends for it, he who cuts off the limbs
of an animal, and he who purchases, sells, or cooks flesh
and eats it -- all these are to be considered meat-
eaters." (Mahabharat, Anu.115.40) All of these people
will also incur the same karmic reactions for their
participation in killing, distributing or eating the
flesh of animals, as explained next.
'"The sins generated by violence curtail the life of the
perpetrator. Therefore, even those who are anxious for
their own welfare should abstain from meat-eating."
(Mahabharat, Anu.115.33)
'"Those who are ignorant of real dharm and, though wicked
and haughty, account themselves virtuous, kill animals
without any feeling of remorse or fear of punishment.
Further, in their next lives, such sinful persons will be
eaten by the same creatures they have killed in this
world." (Bhagavat Puraan 11.5.14)
The following verses are from the Tirukural:
How can he practice true compassion who eats the flesh of
an animal to fatten his own flesh?
Riches cannot be found in the hands of the thriftless,
nor can compassion be found in the hearts of those who
eat meat.
He who feasts on a creature's flesh is like he who wields
a weapon. Goodness is never one with the minds of these
two.
If you ask, "What is kindness and what is unkindness?" It
is not-killing and killing. Thus, eating flesh is never
virtuous.
Life is perpetuated by not eating meat. The jaws of Hell
close on those who do.
If the world did not purchase and consume meat, no one
would slaughter and offer meat for sale.
When a man realizes that meat is the butchered flesh of
another creature, he will abstain from eating it.
Insightful souls who have abandoned the passion to hurt
others will not feed on flesh that life has abandoned.
Greater than a thousand ghee offerings consumed in
sacrificial fires is to not sacrifice and consume any
living creature.
All life will press palms together in prayerful adoration
of those who refuse to slaughter or savor meat.
-From these verses there should be no doubt that the
Vedic shastra recommends that such selfish meat-eating
must be given up if one has any concern for other living
beings, or one's own future existence, or for attaining
any spiritual merit.
'In Bhagavad-gita, however, we also find similar verses
on what is recommended for human consumption. Lord Krshn
says, "If one offers Me with love and devotion a leaf, a
flower, fruit or water, I will accept it." (Bg.9.26) This
means that not only should one be a vegetarian and eat
only fruits, water, grains, vegetables, etc., but such
items should be made as an offering to God with love. The
reason is that, "The devotees of the Lord are released
from all kinds of sins because they eat food which is
offered first for sacrifice. Others, who prepare food for
personal sense enjoyment, verily eat only sin." (Bg.3.13)
So what is offered are only those things that Krshn
accepts. That becomes prasada, or remnants of foods
offered to the Lord.
'As further elaborated in Bhagavad-gita by Lord Shri
Krshn: "O son of Kunti, all that you do, all that you
eat, all that you offer and give away, as well as all
austerities that you may perform, should be done as an
offering unto Me. In this way you will be freed from all
reactions to good and evil deeds, and by this principle
of renunciation you will be liberated and come to Me."
(Bg.9.27)
'Herein we can see that the process of preparing and
eating food is also a part of the Vedic system for making
spiritual advancement. As the Vedic literature explains,
what we eat is an important factor in the process of
purifying ourselves and remaining free from accumulating
bad karm. It actually is not so difficult to be
vegetarian, and it gives one a much higher taste in
eating and in one's spiritual realizations. The level of
our consciousness is also determined not only by what we
think and do, but also by the vibrational level of what
we put into our bodies as food. The more natural and
peaceful the food, the more healthy and peaceful will be
our consciousness. If it is further blessed and offered
to the Lord, then it becomes especially powerful and
spiritualized. This vibration goes into our own bodies
and is assimilated by our consciousness to assist us in
our spiritual upliftment. However, if we eat foods that
are the remnants of animals that were petrified with fear
before being slaughtered, or were tortured during the
slaughter process, that fear, aggression and suffering
will also become a part of our own consciousness, which
is reflected back on our own life and the people with
whom we come in contact. And people wonder why there is
not more peace in the world.
THE QUESTION OF WHETHER LORD RAAM ATE MEAT IN THE
RAMAYAAN
''Sometimes the idea comes up that the Ramayan indicates
that Lord Raam ate meat, especially while He was in exile
in the woods. However, there is no verse in Valmiki's
Ramayan that establishes that Lord Raam, Lakshman or Sita
ate meat while in or even out of exile. In fact, it seems
to show that He very much disliked the notion of eating
meat. The evidence for this is as follows: ''The verse
that comes in question in this regard in the Valmiki
Ramayan, Sundarakand, Skand 36, Shloke 41, says: "Na
mamsam Raghava bhunkte, na chaiva madhu sevate, Vanyam
suvihitam nityam bhaktamsnati panchamam."
''The literal translation of this verse is: "Shri Raam
does not take meat or honey. He partakes everyday of wild
fruits and boiled (wild) rice fully sanctioned (for an
ascetic) in the evening."
''Faulty English translations have put it as something
like this: Hanuman to Sita, "When you were away, Shri
Raam did not even take deer meat." This incorrectly
implies that Raam normally may have ate meat but did not
do so while Sita was away from Him.
''Now in this verse, the Sanskrit word bhunkte is a verb
that means strong desire for eating. It comes from the
Sanskrit bhaksha, which means voracious eating. When you
say Na bhunkte, as we see in the line that says "Na
mamsam Raghava bhunkte", it gives a complete negative
connotation, meaning that Lord Raam abhorred meat-eating.
On the other hand, if the words were "Na mamsam Raghavo
khadate", it could then mean that Raghava may have
engaged in meat eating before, but had stopped it at this
point. However, this is not what is said, but is where
some English translations present a similar confusion, or
are simply unclear about this issue. Nonetheless, by
analyzing the correct view of the proper translation, it
indicates clearly that the Valmiki Ramayan shows how Lord
Raam not only did not eat meat, but greatly disliked it.
THE PRINCIPLE OF BEING MERCIFUL
'Meat-eating and animal slaughter also disrupts and
disregards the doctrine of ahinsa, or non-violence. It is
not possible to kill animals for the pleasure of the
tongue without violence. The Padma Puraan (1.31.27)
simply says that, "Ahinsa is the highest duty."
Therefore, one must honestly ask themselves if they
intend to truly follow the Vedic tenets or not, at least
if they call themselves a Hindu, follower of Vedanta, or
a Sanatana-dharmist. If they are, then they must adopt
the ways of ahinsa.
'Ahinsa is more directly explained in Patanjali's Yoga
Sutras (2.30) wherein it is said: "Having no ill feeling
for any living being, in all manners possible and for all
times, is called ahinsa, and it should be the desired
goal of all seekers."
'It is also said in the Buddhist scripture, the
Mahaparinirvana Sutra, "The eating of meat extinguishes
the seed of great compassion."
'One of the principles that one must follow in the
endeavor to be free from acquiring bad karm and for
spiritual advancement is being merciful, based on ahinsa.
Mercy means more than just being nice. Mercy means being
kind to all living entities, not just to humans, but also
to animals, birds, insects, etc. This is because the
living entity, depending on its consciousness, can take a
material body in any one of the 8,400,000 species of
life. Therefore, to develop and maintain the quality of
mercy, one must follow the principle of no meat eating.
This includes no eating of meat, fish, eggs, or insects.
In this way, those who are serious about a spiritual path
remain free from so many unnecessary karmic reactions.
Karm means that for every action there is an opposite and
equal reaction. Killing an animal to eat is certainly an
act of violence that creates a negative reaction in the
atmosphere which returns as more violence. This comes
back to us as reversals in life which we must endure in
the future.
'It is bluntly stated that meat eating is actually the
grossest form of spiritual ignorance. To kill other
living entities for the pleasure of the tongue is a cruel
and selfish activity that requires one to be almost
completely blind to the spiritual reality of the living
being, that within the body is a soul like you, a part
and parcel of the Supreme Soul. It also causes one to
remain hard-hearted and less sensitive to the concern for
the wellbeing and feelings of others.
'As previously explained, according to the law of karm,
whatever pain we cause for others we will have to suffer
in the future. Therefore, a wise man does not even want
to harm an insect if possible, what to speak of
slaughtering an animal in order to taste its flesh and
blood. As explained in the Manu-samhita, the sinful
reaction for animal slaughter is received by six kinds of
participants, which include, (1) the killer of the
animal, (2) one who advocates or advertises meat-eating,
(3) one who transports the meat, (4) one who handles or
packages the meat, (5) one who prepares or cooks the
meat, and (6) one who eats it.
The sinful reaction shared by these six participants in
animal slaughter is serious. In fact, the Bible compares
the killing of cows to murdering a man: "He that killeth
an ox is as if he slew a man." (Isaiah 66.3) It is also
explained in the Shri Caitanya-caritamrita (Adi-lila,
Chapter 17, verse 166): "Cow killers are condemned to rot
in hellish life for as many thousands of years as there
are hairs on the body of the cow," which is also
referenced in the Manu-samhita. So an intelligent person
will try to avoid this fate.
'Some readers may say, however, that the sacrifices in
the early Vedic literature prescribed animal slaughter,
so for that reason it is all right to kill animals. But
such activities in this day and age are refuted by Shri
Caitanya Mahaprabhu in the Caitanya-caritamrita (Adi-
lila, Chapter 17, verses 159-165) which He explains to
the Chand Kazi who was a Muslim:
'"The Vedas clearly enjoin that cows should not be
killed. Therefore any Hindu, whoever he may be, does not
indulge in cow killing. In the Vedas and Puranas there
are injunctions declaring that if one can revive a living
being, he can kill it for experimental purposes [in the
ritual]. Therefore the great sages sometimes killed old
animals, and by chanting Vedic hymns they again brought
them to life for protection. The killing and rejuvenation
of such old and invalid animals was not truly killing but
an act of great benefit. Formerly there were great
powerful brahmanas who could make such experiments using
Vedic hymns, but now, because of Kali-yuga, brahmanas are
not so powerful. Therefore the killing of cows and bulls
for rejuvenation is forbidden. 'In this age of Kali, five
acts are forbidden: the offering of a horse in sacrifice,
the offering of a cow in sacrifice, the acceptance of the
[renounced] order of sannyasa, the offering of oblations
of flesh to the forefathers, and a man's begetting
children in his brother's wife.' Since you Mohammedans
[and others] cannot bring killed animals back to life,
you are responsible for killing them. Therefore you are
going to hell; there is no way for your deliverance."
'This quotation makes it perfectly clear how anyone who
participates in killing other living beings is
responsible for such acts which cause one to attain a
hellish future, or at the least, causes stifling of their
spiritual progress. We mentioned the karmic reactions for
killing the cow, but there are karmic results that one
acquires from killing other entities as well, which is to
suffer a similar pain or die in a similar way. Whatever
you do unto others will later return to you, either in
this life or in a future life. For every action there is
an equal and opposite reaction. That is the law of karm.
'We can now begin to understand how dark the future is
for someone who owns or manages something like a
hamburger or fried chicken stand. Not only is he
responsible for the animals that are killed, cooked, and
then sold by his business, but he is also responsible for
those he hires to help with it, and those who buy and eat
the dead animals. We can also begin to get an idea of the
dark collective karm of the population of a country whose
food habits are centered around the meat industry. The
violence that is generated by such a society certainly
cannot help but create adverse affects in the world.
THE BENEFIT FROM COWS
'The cow and bull are the prime targets of the meat
industry. However, cows and bulls are very important to
human civilization. Until the recent invention of the
tractor, the bull was used for helping to cultivate
fields for producing food, and the cow has always
supplied milk. A moderate supply of milk in our diet
provides the proper nutrients for developing a good brain
for understanding spiritual topics. Some sadhus in India
do not eat, but take only milk. From milk one can make
many other foods that are used in thousands of recipes
that we all appreciate, such as cheese or curd, yogurt,
kefir, butter, ghee, and so on. (However, this is not to
approve of the cruel and questionable practices of the
dairy industry as found in western countries.) This means
that, according to the Vedas, the cow is one of our
mothers and the bull is like a father for the benefit
they have done for society. To do outright harm to such
creatures is considered extremely serious. 'I have heard
Western people criticize India for not slaughtering its
cows, and talk about how there would be no more starving
children if they would just eat the cows. That is not the
cure. I have traveled all over India and have seen hungry
people there as well as in American cities, which is more
able to hide such problems. Homeless and hungry people
are found in every country. For another thing, cows are
one of India's greatest resources. They produce food,
fuel and power. Bullocks do as much as two-thirds of the
work on the average farm. They help plow the fields, hall
produce, and turn the presses. For India to convert to
machinery to do these tasks, especially in villages,
would cost as much as 20 to 30 billion dollars. For a
country like India, that is out of the question and a
waste of time and money.
'The cows also supply up to 800 tons of manure each year
for fuel. Cow dung gives a slow even heat, good for
cooking. Using coal for cooking would cost 1.5 billion
dollars a year. And besides, believe it or not, cow dung
kills bacteria and is antiseptic. And keeping cows is
cheap since they eat things like wheat stubble, husks,
and rice straw, which people cannot use.
'So why raise cattle for meat consumption when it takes
seven times more acreage for a pound of beef than a pound
of milk? Only four to sixteen pounds of flesh food is
produced for every hundred pounds of food eaten by
cattle. Ten to twenty tons of nutritive vegetable food
can be produced from the same amount of land that can
produce only one ton of beef. In one year, you can get
much more protein from a cow in the form of milk, cheese,
etc., than in the several years it takes for a cow to
mature enough to produce meat. To produce one pound of
wheat takes 25 gallons of water, whereas one pound of
beef requires 2500 gallons. And water is not always a
plentiful resource in countries like India. Obviously,
using agricultural resources for meat production is
nothing but wasteful.
'Furthermore, if we are so concerned about the starving
people in the world and the environment we live in, then
let us consider the fact that 60 million more people in
the world could be fed if Americans reduced their meat
consumption by only 10%. Plus, thousands of acres of
rainforest are lost every day in various countries, and
it is said that 50% of that is directly linked to raising
cattle for meat production. And though 76% of Americans
consider themselves concerned about the environment, only
2.8% are vegetarians (at the time of this writing). Many
Americans may say they love animals, but they still eat
them on a regular basis. Obviously, they need to raise
their consciousness about this. In any case, there are
many books on the market that present this type of
environmental information much more thoroughly.
''For those of you who would like to learn more about
what a vegetarian diet can do for you and how to cook
vegetarian meals easily, there are plenty of books
available to help you get started. Or check here on my
website for additional information and resources to get
started.
[This article available at: http://www.stephen-knapp.com ]
More at:
http://www.stephen-knapp.com/vegetarianism_recommended_in_Vedic_scripture.htm
Jai Maharaj
http://tinyurl.com/a5ljc
http://www.mantra.com/jai
Om Shanti
Hindu Holocaust Museum
http://www.mantra.com/holocaust
Hindu life, principles, spirituality and philosophy
http://www.hindu.org
http://www.hindunet.org
The truth about Islam and Muslims
http://www.flex.com/~jai/satyamevajayate
The terrorist mission of Jesus stated in the Christian bible:
"Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not so send
peace, but a sword.
"For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the
daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in
law.
"And a man's foes shall be they of his own household.
- Matthew 10:34-36.
o Not for commercial use. Solely to be fairly used for the educational
purposes of research and open discussion. The contents of this post may not
have been authored by, and do not necessarily represent the opinion of the
poster. The contents are protected by copyright law and the exemption for
fair use of copyrighted works.
o If you send private e-mail to me, it will likely not be read,
considered or answered if it does not contain your full legal name, current
e-mail and postal addresses, and live-voice telephone number.
o Posted for information and discussion. Views expressed by others are
not necessarily those of the poster who may or may not have read the article.
FAIR USE NOTICE: This article may contain copyrighted material the use of
which may or may not have been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner. This material is being made available in efforts to advance the
understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic,
democratic, scientific, social, and cultural, etc., issues. It is believed
that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as
provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title
17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without
profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included
information for research, comment, discussion and educational purposes by
subscribing to USENET newsgroups or visiting web sites. For more information
go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
If you wish to use copyrighted material from this article for purposes of
your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the
copyright owner.
Since newsgroup posts are being removed
by forgery by one or more net terrorists,
this post may be reposted several times.
Leif Erikson
> WHY HINDUS DON'T EAT MEAT
>
> Besides being an expression of compassion
> for animals, vegetarianism is followed for
> ecological and health rationales
No. That's not why Hindus are vegetarian.
>
> REASONS
>
> In the past fifty years, millions of meat-eaters --
> Hindus and non-Hindus -- have made the personal decision
> to stop eating the flesh of other creatures. There are
> five major motivations for such a decision:
>
> 1. The Dharmic Law Reason
>
> Ahinsa, the law of noninjury, is the Hindu's first
> duty in fulfilling religious obligations to God and God's
> creation as defined by Vedic scripture.
>
> 2. The Karmic Consequences Reason
>
> All of our actions, including our choice of food,
> have Karmic consequences. By involving oneself in the
> cycle of inflicting injury, pain and death, even
> indirectly by eating other creatures, one must in the
> future experience in equal measure the suffering caused.
Uh-oh! *Really* bad news for "vegans" concerning
collateral deaths in agriculture, then.
harmony
veggie food.
<use...@mantra.comhJlPWWszQ or www.mantra.com/jai (Dr. Jai Maharaj)> wrote
in message news:20060605KH78BlgVhJlPWWszQixiyDw@HLhwq...
or www.mantra.com/jai
vegetarians must be given credit for not
eating corpses as non-vegetarians do,
Jai Maharaj
http://tinyurl.com/a5ljc
http://www.mantra.com/jai
Om Shanti
In article <y4Zgg.206380$5Z.183828@dukeread02>,
"harmony" <a...@hotmail.com> posted:
> the american vegetarians are a funny people; they use meat flavors on their
> veggie food.
>
>
> www.mantra.com/jai (Dr. Jai Maharaj) posted:
rick
<use...@mantra.comqwuwHOA or www.mantra.com/jai (Dr. Jai
Maharaj)> wrote in message
news:20060605Z6598r2EtqwuwHOAhZ79a71@DO7kZ...
> If those are simulated flavors, then the
> vegetarians must be given credit for not
> eating corpses as non-vegetarians do,
And, given credit for killing more animals than some meat eaters.
me
> Dr. Jai Maharaj wrote:
>> WHY HINDUS DON'T EAT MEAT
>> have Karmic consequences. By involving oneself in the
>> cycle of inflicting injury, pain and death, even
>> indirectly by eating other creatures, one must in the
>> future experience in equal measure the suffering caused.
>
> Uh-oh! *Really* bad news for "vegans" concerning
> collateral deaths in agriculture, then.
About how many animals are typically killed in the process of producing
enough lentils to substitute for the protein present in the carcass of 1
cow? IOW, how many times greater is the number of lives taken by lentil
eaters, as compared to beef eaters?
Dr. Homilete
Good God! Thou ate beef?
Bhosle is still in Opposition mode, thanks to Bharatiya Janata Party
corporator Parag Alvani getting hives over "our children" being lured to
non- vegetarianism by Ronald McDonald. Before taking off, let me make
one thing clear - excepting pizza, I detest all Western fast-food.
Personally, I'll be glad to see KFC being replaced by a Singh's Tandoori
Chicken. And I don't eat beef in India. But, I've had enough of swadeshi
veggienazis. So here goes...
On 31 March, 1996, the Vishwa Hindu Parishad set about to play the worst
April Fool's joke on India. Its London spokesman, Hasmukh Shah, said on
BBC's Sunday: "We have offered to look after the 12 million cattle which
are facing execution (in Britain)... It is immoral to slaughter these
cows and they should be allowed to lead their natural lives." No, the
VHP wasn't going to open a sick corral in Britain to nurse the Bovine
Spongiform Encephalopathy-inflicted cows. Instead, it wanted Britain to
cough up 1 billion pounds in shipment charges - to transport the cows to
India!
Which was convenient for the UK since the cost of slaughtering the cows
would have amounted to more than 20 billion pounds. And it was safe for
the VHP's milk-consuming spokesman living in Britain. Please note: none
of this happened at the lunatic-fringe level. Apart from Britain's
health secretary being sounded, Shah claimed that the
diseased-cow-importing proposal had the support of the BJP -- the
strongest contender against the Congress in the coming elections.
In the world according to the VHP (so close is it to Garp's), India
could afford to sustain the extra 12 million heads: "India has
sanctuaries across the country where the cattle can be allowed to live
the full course of their lives. We already support a total of 500
million cattle." I guess the august body believed that: a) India is not
susceptible to drought and famine and has a surplus of grass, fodder and
land to spare; b) in sanctuaries, the mad-cows would never be preyed
upon, and thus the danger of BSE infecting other animals was
nonexistent; c) never could an Indian be bribed to "lose" a few
BSE-cankered cattle heads; and d) in a nation of doodh mein milaavat,
there was no question of BSE-tainted milk products finding their way to
the market...
Shah termed the impending cow slaughter merely "immoral." There was no
reference to the sanctity of cows as exists in the VHP's version of
Hinduism... Clever...
But not clever enough: In 1995, if the VHP had offered to harbour
Australia's huge rabbit population which was infected by the rabbit
calcivirus disease and thus slated to be destroyed, I may have seen the
morality in the mad-cow proposal. If the VHP had sent donations and
volunteers to save the millions of penguins, pelicans, seals and terns
about to be wiped off by the July 1996 oil slick off Tasmania or the
spill off Alaska, I may have said, OK, these guys really feel for all
praani-jaat.
While all this wildlife was on the verge of extinction, the Parivar was
busy in India trying to bring a ban on cows raised for the very purpose
of slaughter. The VHP has never had a presence in any animal rights
issue except that of the holy cow. And don't we all know that the
communities with the most money to spare for donations are predominantly
vegetarian and especially against beef-consumption?
The Bhagwad Gita is the source which inspired Chanakya's niti. The sages
of the VHP, however, read the tome differently. That the sublime means
to save cows could end in an evil -- the poisoning of India -- did not
occur to them. This kind of blinkered thinking denotes a type of Hindu
not different from the mad mullahs of Islam. Gou-hatya as paap and
sooar-khana as haraam are two faces of the same counterfeit coin.
Hinduism has no constraints on animal slaughter -- unless you count the
prescriptive methods of cooking, carving and distribution of the meat of
animals as such. It is based on the theology of sanaatan Vedic Aryans,
but Hare Krishna-ites, who live by the same scriptures and strive to
recreate an inferred Vedic lifestyle with gurukuls, etc, would rather
not be known as Hindu...
They are quite right. Theirs is an extremist cult mere decades old,
while Hinduism flourishes where its sister civilisations bowed to
Christianity or Buddhism or Islam. Today, there's not a trace of the
heritage of Rameses, Caesar or Confucius, of the Hellenic Greeks, or of
Nineveh and Babylon. However, right from the dawn of civilisation, an
unbroken thread of culture has continued to run through Brahmvart, then
Aryavart and Bharatvarsh, to Hindustan and India. It wouldn't have been
possible if the philosophy wasn't rock-solid and yet flexible against
the winds of cultural wars.
Just as the Quran is employed to sanction fatwas against ideas, so also
is Hinduism being used to prop up the bigotries of puritans -- which lot
always is lethal for any society. The Sangh Parivar will have us believe
that Hindutva asks for protection of cows as a religious tenet.
Bullshit! It's simply goodbye Hindu laissez faire; hello, Hindutva fatwas.
Indian Food, a scholarly look at the gastronomic traditions of ancient
India by Dr KT Acharya, indicates that Vedic Aryans ate all kinds of
meats, including horses, buffaloes, bulls and cows. For instance, the
Rigved recounts the rituals in animal sacrifice and the roasting and
carving of its meat -- with Brahmin priests receiving the choicest cuts
as prasaad. A black cow was favoured by Pushan, red by Rudra, an ox by
Vishnu, and bulls by Agni and Indra -- the latter urged to slay his foes
"just as cows are butchered at the altar of sacrifice."
In the Mahabharat and Ramayan, sumptuous feasts abound with the meat of
pigs, deer, sheep, fowl and "young buffalo calves roasted on spits with
ghee dripping on them". The Atharvaved mentions the sacrificial cow as
"destined for the Gods and Brahmins." And in the Brhadaranyak Upanishad,
Sushrutha, the father of Indian medicine, describes beef as being
pavitra for health. So much for Hindu vegetarianism itself, let alone
holy cows.
When utilitarian needs sought to discourage the slaying of milch cows
and draught oxen by declaring beef-eating a sin, the Upanishad sage
Yagnavalkya stated in the Shatapath Brahmana, "That may well be, but I
shall eat of it nevertheless if the flesh is tender." *That* is the true
face of Hinduism, where the odds are weighed by an individual instead of
blindly following a supposedly divine decree of haraam. Karma and moksha
are at his discretion alone.
It wasn't until the rule of the Buddhist emperor Ashok and the advent of
Mahavir that the ethos of vegetarianism began to take hold among a
section of the populace, mainly Brahmins. However, even after centuries
of glorification of the Utopian concept of ahimsa, today, only about a
quarter of India's population is fully vegetarian. (Thank god for the
Kshatriyas and Shudhras.)
Veggienazis hold that flesh-eating is contrary to the advance of
humankind; that man progressed to agriculture while hunting remained
savage; that it's unkind to beasts. The argument is as dumb as saying
that now that the world has progressed to PCs and the Internet, reading
books is primitive. For, pulping wood into paper is cruel to living
trees and more harmful to ecology than the dispatching of animals bred
for the purpose. So, should reading books be deterred?
Of us Hindu "savages", a robust percentage *chooses* to eat beef, and,
more significantly, the poor can't afford much else. Besides, it's eaten
by Christians, Jews and Parsis, too. But since the VHP gets to tweak its
thumb at Mosies, everybody is to be exposed to the vagaries of Ashok
Singhal & Company.
The hypocrisy of it all amazes me: By the scriptures, the slaying of
cows is a lesser sin (upapaatak) than the drinking of alcohol
(mahapaatak). Even so, the prohibition of alcohol is not brandished as a
Hindu mainstay, nor is it seriously enforced. A top Sainik has converted
his restaurant into a pub: A ban on liquor holds no thrills since it
doesn't irk Mosies - who, on their part, insist on slaughtering cows to
tweak their thumbs at Hindus. And lest someone be inspired to enforce
prohibition on Hinduism grounds, the Mahabharat indicates that Lord
Krishna liked his booze binges with Arjun...
The Sangh Parivar seems to communicate exclusively with Him/Her. I don't
like it - it's the first step to a theocratic rule, akin to repression
by the Shariat. After railing against the transparently self-serving
stands of the Shahi Imam (who at least has a religious warrant), the BJP
itself will flounder into the dubious realm of religious edicts, which,
by nature, are forever open to interpretation.
I've always promoted Hindutva's struggle against illegal immigrants, its
move to abolish the Minorities Commission, and to implement the Uniform
Civil Code. I have also accepted Ram Janmabhoomi. These measures are
necessary for a society where no one is more equal than the others, and
they are based on the functioning of a government. When the party is
bandied as targeting Mosies on these issues, it's the anti-Hindu
factions who mar progress by implanting a self-demeaning form of
liberalism in Hindus *and* an unfounded righteousness in Muslims.
I can't say the same about a ban on beef. It's a god-forsaken concept,
far removed from democracy and governmental performance, and with no
basis in the Vedas, whence evolved classical Hinduism.
In the Gita, when Arjun refused to fight his Kaurav cousins, Lord
Krishna's ensuing argument may be boiled down to a Machiavellian
one-liner: the end (of establishing a dharma-sanstha) justifies the
means (massacre of kinsmen): Let the arrows rip and leave the
consequences to Me. Which, incidentally, Arjun did. The beauty of
Hinduism lies in this very practicality -- of an individual's
considering the odds of his own temporal actions.
At least in madness of the VHP kind, the Congress tradition has been
remarkably different: In his column in Navjeevan, Mahatma Gandhi, while
replying to an avalanche of letters deploring his 'inhumane' deed of
putting to sleep a terminally-ill cow of the Sabarmati Ashram, stolidly
defended his decision. Surprised? Why? Gandhi was a learned man, more
than well-versed in the Bhagwad Gita.
Even at a selfish level, a ban on cow slaughter frightens me: What if
Muslims ask for a ban on my bacon? What if Jains demand one on mutton,
chicken and fish? What if Maneka wants to ban cheese (which requires cow
rennet)? Someday, some loony-tunes may give in and I'll be stuck with,
yuck, only bhindis and karelas!
If policy-makers hold the lives of animals to be more significant than
the welfare of a human populace, I can't believe that they're likely to
do anything progressive for India. If the BJP wants to keep only its
orthodox bhasma-smeared votes (which, I'm told, are more numerous than
my kind), bring on the ban. But a thinking person's support has to be
weaned by going above and beyond groundless puritanism. That's what
makes me a Hindu. What about you?
http://www.rediff.com/news/1998/apr/16varsha.htm
Dr. Homilete
> <use...@mantra.comqwuwHOA or www.mantra.com/jai (Dr. Jai
> Maharaj)> wrote in message
> news:20060605Z6598r2EtqwuwHOAhZ79a71@DO7kZ...
>
>>If those are simulated flavors, then the
>>vegetarians must be given credit for not
>>eating corpses as non-vegetarians do,
>>==========================
>
> And, given credit for killing more animals than some meat eaters.
"Vegetarians"(aka mercenaries) like Johnny Maharaj prefer killing human
beings, especially if they are girls, Christians and/or Muslims.
See http://cac.ektaonline.org/resources/reports/womensreport.htm
Dasa anudasa
"rick" <st...@stop.net> wrote in message
news:Et_gg.1785$o4...@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>
> <use...@mantra.comqwuwHOA or www.mantra.com/jai (Dr. Jai Maharaj)> wrote
> in message news:20060605Z6598r2EtqwuwHOAhZ79a71@DO7kZ...
>> If those are simulated flavors, then the
>> vegetarians must be given credit for not
>> eating corpses as non-vegetarians do,
>> ==========================
> And, given credit for killing more animals than some meat eaters.
Rick, why do you make accusations that are not backed up with facts? If you
have the facts, don't be lazy, post them! If there are no facts, and you
just made this stuff up, then why be such a troll?
Do you enjoy arguing just for the sake of argument?
Dasa anudasa
"Leif Erikson" <pi...@thedismalscience.net> wrote in message
news:0jXgg.1764$lp....@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
> Dr. Jai Maharaj wrote:
>> WHY HINDUS DON'T EAT MEAT
>>
>> Besides being an expression of compassion
>> for animals, vegetarianism is followed for
>> ecological and health rationales
>
> No. That's not why Hindus are vegetarian.
Ok, then tell us why, if you think you're more qualified.
>> All of our actions, including our choice of food,
>> have Karmic consequences. By involving oneself in the
>> cycle of inflicting injury, pain and death, even
>> indirectly by eating other creatures, one must in the
>> future experience in equal measure the suffering caused.
>
> Uh-oh! *Really* bad news for "vegans" concerning collateral deaths in
> agriculture, then.
Not all vegans believe in karma, ya goof. And even if they did, what harm is
there in minimizing your "karmic debt"?
I'll answer for you - the only thing that a vegan harms by reducing their
personal eating of meat is the profits of those involved in the meat
industry, and the egos of those who know that meat eating is harmful, yet
refuse to stop or reduce their own consumption.
Neil Boss
Chapter 9 verse 26
If one offers Me with love and devotion a leaf, a flower, fruit or water, I
will accept it.
Krishna does not accept meat, fish, eggs, etc...
Dasa anudasa
"Neil Boss" <neilbo...@yahoo.com.au> wrote in message
news:e7l97k$mj3$4...@news-02.connect.com.au...
> Bhagvat Gita states:
>
> Chapter 9 verse 26
>
> If one offers Me with love and devotion a leaf, a flower, fruit or water,
> I
> will accept it.
Not all "Hindus" are devotees of Krishna, and even amongst those, some had
allowances for meat eating.
Neil Boss
Many people do not belive in God ! So what?
Like going through red traffic lights you do not have to believe in the law
but when u do go through them you get fined. So saying *most* Hindus are not
devotees is a bit like going through the lights.
Alloances for eating meat have been made they prayers are quite good to to
eat meat ...
Long the lines of ...
As I eat you so you will eat me in my next life ... I can see how good that
is.
Dasa anudasa <dasan...@servant.com> wrote in message
news:eSqng.11805$o4.1...@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
me
The Bhagavad Gita also claims that he wrote the Vedic Samhitas in which,
except for Soma sacrifice, all the other sacrifices listed are meat.
Dr. Homilete
> "Leif Erikson" <pi...@thedismalscience.net> wrote in message
> news:0jXgg.1764$lp....@newsread3.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>
>>Dr. Jai Maharaj wrote:
>>
>>>WHY HINDUS DON'T EAT MEAT
>>>
>>>Besides being an expression of compassion
>>>for animals, vegetarianism is followed for
>>>ecological and health rationales
>>
>>No. That's not why Hindus are vegetarian.
>
>
> Ok, then tell us why, if you think you're more qualified.
Hindus are not vegetarian. *Some* Hindus are. Most Hindus(as classified
in India) eat one or more of the following: eggs, dairy, chicken,
mutton(lamb and/or goat), fish, pork, turkey and more. Some Hindus even
eat beef(both buffalo as well as cattle). I would estimate that,
countrywide, Hindus who are strict vegetarians are probably between 30%
and 40% of the total. I would add another 10-15% for ovo-lacto
vegetarians. And the numbers are coming down as the country becomes more
prosperous and people are able to afford food luxuries. Gujarat is
probably the one exception, where more than half and probably upward of
90% of Hindus are vegetarian/lacto-vegetarian.
Btw, Jay Maharaj is not a strict vegetarian(rather doubt he's any kind
of vegetarian, he got kicked out of Gauranga's Pure Vegetarian
Buffet and Wedding Gardens- probably brought a flask of brandy and some
chicken wings in his bastaa), as indicated by his shoving ghee into
Pardipshit Parekh's mouth, his rather unctuous blessing of that
parasite's sycophantic praise of him. A mutual admiration society of two.
Dr. Homilete
Does he accept corn, wheat, potatoes etc.? You can't make a case for
vegetarianism on the basis of Chapter 9 verse 26.
-----------------------------------------------------
"Krishnas have beef with meat ad"
("NZOOM.com," February 20, 2003)
New Zealand Hare Krishna devotees are demanding a television
advertisement for meat be taken off the air because they say it
ridicules their religion.
They have made a formal complaint over the NZ Beef and Lamb Marketing
Bureau advertisement, which features a group of butchers dancing,
singing and chanting along a street.
The Hare Krishnas argue it is a clear imitation of their chants.
"Chanting is traditionally taken to public on the street and it is a
serious activity not to be ridiculed," says Hare Krishna spokesperson
Jaya Shila.
As vegetarians, the association with meat has angered them even more.
"The unnecessary killing of animals is against our basic belief," Shila
says.
But NZ Beef and Lamb says the Krishnas will just have to get used to the
campaign.
"The concept is butchers are jolly, happy characters, they're
extroverted and here's a shot of them dancing down the street singing
the benefits of red meat," says spokesman Rod Slater.
"It's as simple as that.
"We're not pulling the ads, they're not meant to be offensive... there's
more in the series to come and we can't wait for that
Neil Boss
dip a few crosses with a deadman in urine for fun.
Dr. Homilete <lo...@my.mojo> wrote in message
news:NJxng.9133$U%1.3868@trndny07...
Dr. Homilete
> Yes he does. The same happened in Australia with the ad. As I say we need to
> dip a few crosses with a deadman in urine for fun.
And you probably need your diaper changed.
rick
I suggest you learn how to use your computer and review many
posts I have made. My facts are backed up, unlike the vegan/AR
lys that are posted here over and over.... Do try not to appear
to be so trollish yourself and try to learn, rather than spew
your brainwashing mantras...
>
> Do you enjoy arguing just for the sake of argument?
=========================
No, I do enjoy bashing the hell out the lys that vegans state.
Plus. exposing their hypocrisy is always in good taste...
>
>
Dasa anudasa
>> you have the facts, don't be lazy, post them! If there are no facts, and
>> you just made this stuff up, then why be such a troll?
> =========================
> I suggest you learn how to use your computer and review many posts I have
> made
Youre right. It's my responsibilty to research your posts and make your
arguments for you.
Well..., no. Not really. :)
> My facts are backed up,
You mean your arguments are backed up
> unlike the vegan/AR lys that are posted here over and over....
Whatever those arguments are is none of my concern, and far from the point.
You made up some stuff, and now you say its my job to verify what you said.
I don't think I'm going too do that. You made the claim, YOU back it up.
Do try not to appear
> to be so trollish yourself and try to learn, rather than spew your
> brainwashing mantras...
Oh I'm a troll...you're a troll...we're all trolls...blah blah blah...
You said vegetarians should be "given credit for killing more animals than
some meat eaters."
Prove it.
rick
>>> Rick, why do you make accusations that are not backed up with
>>> facts? If you have the facts, don't be lazy, post them! If
>>> there are no facts, and you just made this stuff up, then why
>>> be such a troll?
>> =========================
>> I suggest you learn how to use your computer and review many
>> posts I have made
>
> Youre right. It's my responsibilty to research your posts and
> make your arguments for you.
>
> Well..., no. Not really. :)
>
>> My facts are backed up,
>
> You mean your arguments are backed up
Whatever, the facts are posted. that you wish to remain
willfully ignorant is typical...
>
>> unlike the vegan/AR lys that are posted here over and over....
>
> Whatever those arguments are is none of my concern, and far
> from the point. You made up some stuff, and now you say its my
> job to verify what you said.
============================
No fool, I did not make up anything. I have posted my data, many
many times. Too bad you're too stupid to understand the posts,
eh fool?
>
> I don't think I'm going too do that. You made the claim, YOU
> back it up.
==========================
I have. Now it's up to you to refute the data, killer.
>
> Do try not to appear
>> to be so trollish yourself and try to learn, rather than spew
>> your brainwashing mantras...
>
> Oh I'm a troll...you're a troll...we're all trolls...blah blah
> blah...
=====================
LOL Keep trying little-one. Maybe someday you'll come up with
something on your own...
>
> You said vegetarians should be "given credit for killing more
> animals than some meat eaters."
>
> Prove it.
======================
I have fool. many times... Try some original thinking on your
own, instead of the brainwashing you so dearly love, eh fool...
>
>
Dasa anudasa
Without trying very hard at all, I've reduced you to the point where you are
only capable of tossing out juvenile insults. On second thought, I believe I
had nothing to do with your weaknesses emerging. I merely scratched at the
surface of your ridiculous claim, and you lost your cool immediately. Well,
your insults are ineffective, your argument is unsupported, and your time is
up, Rickles.
Still...thanks for the laughs--it's been a blast. Really.
"rick" <st...@stop.net> wrote in message
news:G82pg.323$ye3...@newsread1.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>
> "Dasa anudasa" <dasan...@servant.com> wrote in message
> news:c4%og.188$PE1...@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>>>> Rick, why do you make accusations that are not backed up with facts? If
>>>> you have the facts, don't be lazy, post them! If there are no facts,
>>>> and you just made this stuff up, then why be such a troll?
>>> =========================
>>> I suggest you learn how to use your computer and review many posts I
>>> have made
>>
>> You're right. It's my responsibility to research your posts and make your
*ellie*
is a healthier option. Between 1911 to 1920 the life expectancy in
India was 20 years.
http://indianchild.com/life_expectany_mortality_india.htm
More data: http://www.who.int/inf-pr-2000/en/pr2000-life.html
I am not promoting meat eating, but we cannot oversimplify and
generalize. We have to look at the whole picture or nutrition, poverty,
genetics, health services etc. Hinduism is an ancient philosophy that
produced a great culture, but values, standards and philosophies
thought out 4000 - 6000 years ago may need a bit of upgrading from time
to time? It is only a question, not a statement.
rick
> LMAO
>
> Without trying very hard at all, I've reduced you to the point
> where you are only capable of tossing out juvenile insults. On
> second thought, I believe I had nothing to do with your
> weaknesses emerging. I merely scratched at the surface of your
> ridiculous claim, and you lost your cool immediately. Well,
> your insults are ineffective, your argument is unsupported, and
> your time is up, Rickles.
>
> Still...thanks for the laughs--it's been a blast. Really.
What a hoot!! Thanks for proving your ignorance and stupidity
fool. Too bad you can't learn to use your computer or learn any
facts about crop production. Come on back when you've stopped
running from the truth, killer.
Again, thanks for proving the typical willful ignorance of the
vegan brainwashing, fool... Keep up the good work, you're a
credit to stupidity everywhere.
Dasa anudasa
simple concepts.
Visit:
http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html#hominem
and:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Ad%20Hominem%20
The more you try to insult me, and the more you avoid supporting your
argument, the lower you fall. Good day.
rick
> Ok Rick, here's a response for you, just in case you don't
> understand the simple concepts.
Simple is the operative word when talking with you, isn't it? I
guess the big words have been too much for you, eh fool?
Thanks for proving again that you cannot refute what I have
posted, amny many times, nor defend anything you seem to post.
Maybe you should read what you post, idiot. You've yet to refute
my facts, just spewing your idiocy instead.
I suggest you learn your own logic first, killer.
>
> Visit:
> http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org/skeptic/arguments.html#hominem
>
> and:
> http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Ad%20Hominem%20
>
>
> The more you try to insult me, and the more you avoid
> supporting your argument, the lower you fall. Good day.
=========================
Run like the wind little-one.... You're ignorance is already
displayed...
>
>
and/or www.mantra.com/jai
As a matter of fact, contrary to popular belief and "fact books",
true Hindus are a minority in Bharat (aka India).
Jai Maharaj
http://tinyurl.com/a5ljc
http://www.mantra.com/jai
Om Shanti
In article <1151670181....@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>,
"*ellie*" <mbp...@gmail.com> posted:
> Interesting, but facts do not bear out the premise that vegetarianism
> is a healthier option. Between 1911 to 1920 the life expectancy in
> India was 20 years.
>
> http://indianchild.com/life_expectany_mortality_india.htm
>
> More data: http://www.who.int/inf-pr-2000/en/pr2000-life.html
>
> I am not promoting meat eating, but we cannot oversimplify and
> generalize. We have to look at the whole picture or nutrition, poverty,
> genetics, health services etc. Hinduism is an ancient philosophy that
> produced a great culture, but values, standards and philosophies
> thought out 4000 - 6000 years ago may need a bit of upgrading from time
> to time? It is only a question, not a statement.
> Dr. Jai Maharaj posted:
Dasa anudasa
"*ellie*" <mbp...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1151670181....@i40g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
> Interesting, but facts do not bear out the premise that vegetarianism
> is a healthier option. Between 1911 to 1920 the life expectancy in
> India was 20 years.
>
> http://indianchild.com/life_expectany_mortality_india.htm
>
> More data: http://www.who.int/inf-pr-2000/en/pr2000-life.html
Talk about misuse of statistics. First off, none of these sites discusses
the impact (positive or negative) of vegetarianism, so you've offered
absolutely no direct evidence.
Second, the reasons given for low life expectancy in India are chiefly
related to health care and sanitation, not diet, so your use of these facts
is completely out of context.
Third, the American Dietetic Association, the largest organization of
nutrition professionals, states on its website "Vegetarian diets offer a
number of nutritional benefits, including lower levels of saturated fat,
cholesterol, and animal protein as well as higher levels of carbohydrates,
fiber, magnesium, potassium, folate, and antioxidants such as vitamins C and
E and phytochemicals. Vegetarians have been reported to have lower body mass
indices than nonvegetarians, as well as lower rates of death from ischemic
heart disease; vegetarians also show lower blood cholesterol levels; lower
blood pressure; and lower rates of hypertension, type 2 diabetes, and
prostate and colon cancer."
http://www.eatright.org/cps/rde/xchg/ada/hs.xsl/advocacy_933_ENU_HTML.htm
And finally, the American Heart Association's website states "Many studies
have shown that vegetarians seem to have a lower risk of obesity, coronary
heart disease (which causes heart attack), high blood pressure, diabetes
mellitus and some forms of cancer."
http://www.americanheart.org/presenter.jhtml?identifier=4777
(Thanks to Wikipedia for the links)
So, your satatement that "facts do not bear out the premise that
vegetarianism is a healthier option" is--at the very least--ill-founded, and
more than likely entirely false.
*ellie*
Dasa anudasa
"*ellie*" <mbp...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1151752268.0...@75g2000cwc.googlegroups.com...
hari....@indero.com
are about 20 percent of indian population and eat meat, the vast majority
of indian citizens eat meat. Because almost all vegetarian indians use
milk products and eggs if they can afford them, making the so called
"vegan" diet popular in some western places a non-indian concept.
Judy
don't need to be so rude to people! You've insulted people's religions,
ethics, ect. You don't seem to get the fact that while stopping animal
cruelty is important, you have no right to insult other people's
cultures because of that!
In some of your other posts, you directly call people stupid, when you
hardly have any facts to support your opinions.
Also, in most of your posts, you just tell people what not to eat.
Don't eat farm crops, don't eat animals, don't eat tofu, don't eat
non-local foods, don't eat packaged goods, don't eat...
Well, you know what rick? I live in a fishing community outside of
Anchorage (that's in Alaska if you didn't know). As you can imagine the
local foods are abundant... NOT! If I can't eat fish or imported foods,
what in the world do I eat!? I can't keep a garden and there are no
farms since it is so cold most of the year. What do I eat!? Snow?
Sounds great!
So I don't think I have a choice... I must eat animals and imported
foods.
In conclusion, rick, when someone asks for help or advice... don't give
them a list of reasons that they are wrong without first HELPING
THEM!!! Remember, you don't know everything about everyone. You have to
put yourself in their shoes for once. You have to realize that not
everyone has the option to not eat those things, and that most people
find their religions very important (though I do not belong to a
religion, I still believe this) and telling them that their religion is
wrong, is offending them in the worst way.
Oh, and out of curiosity, what do you eat? Could you do us a favor and
eat your computer so we don't have to listen to you anymore.
rick
Sorry, my reply was meant for the group, not email...
----- Original Message -----
From: "Judy" <duckied...@comcast.net>
Newsgroups:
soc.culture.indian,alt.fan.jai-maharaj,alt.religion.hindu,alt.religion.vaisnava,alt.animals.ethics.vegetarian
Sent: Monday, July 10, 2006 3:39 PM
Subject: *** WHY HINDUS DON'T EAT MEAT ***
> Here's the thing, rick, I've been following several of your
> posts. You
> don't need to be so rude to people! You've insulted people's
> religions,
> ethics, ect. You don't seem to get the fact that while stopping
> animal
> cruelty is important, you have no right to insult other
> people's
> cultures because of that!
=======================
No, jay-boy is the insult to hindus, not me. he's a fake...
>
> In some of your other posts, you directly call people stupid,
> when you
> hardly have any facts to support your opinions.
=========================
Yes, I do. If you had read my posts as you claim, you would have
seen them
at one time or another. As to others ignorance and stupidity,
they post
that quite often, it's hard not to notice it, eh?
>
> Also, in most of your posts, you just tell people what not to
> eat.
> Don't eat farm crops, don't eat animals, don't eat tofu, don't
> eat
> non-local foods, don't eat packaged goods, don't eat...
=============================
No, I have not. Show an example of were I told somebody that
couldn't eat
something. Your comprehension must be getting blocked by some
brainwashing,
what?
>
> Well, you know what rick? I live in a fishing community outside
> of
> Anchorage (that's in Alaska if you didn't know). As you can
> imagine the
> local foods are abundant... NOT! If I can't eat fish or
> imported foods,
> what in the world do I eat!? I can't keep a garden and there
> are no
> farms since it is so cold most of the year. What do I eat!?
> Snow?
> Sounds great!
========================
Why can't you eat fish? Besides, seems to me that peoples there
have
survived without imported fruits and veggies for 100s if not
1000s of years.
I suggest that it is YOUR unnatural diet that is your problem.
>
> So I don't think I have a choice... I must eat animals and
> imported
> foods.
>
> In conclusion, rick, when someone asks for help or advice...
> don't give
> them a list of reasons that they are wrong without first
> HELPING
> THEM!!!
=========================
I have. Many times. The loons here continue to spew their
ignorance
instead. Case noted....
Remember, you don't know everything about everyone. You have to
> put yourself in their shoes for once.
===========================
No, I don't. I have to do no such thing to realize an unnatural
diet when I
see one. I have to do no such thing to see hypocrisy when it's
expressed
here by vegan loons.
You have to realize that not
> everyone has the option to not eat those things, and that most
> people
> find their religions very important (though I do not belong to
> a
> religion, I still believe this) and telling them that their
> religion is
> wrong, is offending them in the worst way.
=============================
Again, quote an example of where I said a religion is wrong.
>
> Oh, and out of curiosity, what do you eat? Could you do us a
> favor and
> eat your computer so we don't have to listen to you anymore.
=============================
Thanks for proving you really have nothing to contrbute except
more
ignorance and stupidity.
>
Fred C. Dobbs
> WHY HINDUS DON'T EAT MEAT
Many Hindus *DO* eat meat, Stevens.
>
> Besides being an expression of compassion
> for animals,
No, it isn't.
>
> Since newsgroup posts are being removed
> by forgery by one or more net terrorists,
No, they're not, Stevens. Your paranoia is consuming you, boy.
> this post may be reposted several times.
You mean *RESPAMMED* several times, Stevens.
Steelclaws
wrote:
> On 6/5/2006 5:05 AM, Jay Stevens - *not* a doctor, *not* a Hindoo - lied:
>
> > WHY HINDUS DON'T EAT MEAT
>
> Many Hindus *DO* eat meat, Stevens.
Check out the Hindu Gadhimai festival of Nepal: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gadhimai_festival
Quite an amount of animals sacrificed. Also goat meat shortage
predicted due to the 5 million attendees consuming it.
I bet the NTS fallacy will be employed by those who claim Hindus don't
eat meat.
harmony
"Steelclaws" <tenqu...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
news:02dde018-2430-4b61...@o8g2000yqo.googlegroups.com...
---------------------
hindus of current india are a confused, disoriented people, thanks to
communists and their maoists, congressis and their goondas, kirastanistas
and their inquistadoras, mohamadism and their terrorist, the media and their
masters described per preceding. hindus are locked out of the chaotic indian
system.
Steelclaws
> Check out the Hindu Gadhimai festival of Nepal:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gadhimai_festival
>
> Quite an amount of animals sacrificed. Also goat meat shortage
> predicted due to the 5 million attendees consuming it.
>
> I bet the NTS fallacy will be employed by those who claim Hindus don't
> eat meat.
>
> ---------------------
> hindus of current india are a confused, disoriented people, thanks to
> communists and their maoists, congressis and their goondas, kirastanistas
> and their inquistadoras, mohamadism and their terrorist, the media and their
> masters described per preceding. hindus are locked out of the chaotic indian
> system.
And that little diatribe has precisely what to do with the Gadhimai
festival of Nepal?
and/or www.mantra.com/jai
"harmony" <a...@hotmail.com> posted:
> hindus of current india are a confused, disoriented people, thanks to
> communists and their maoists, congressis and their goondas, kirastanistas
> and their inquistadoras, mohamadism and their terrorist, the media and their
> masters described per preceding. hindus are locked out of the chaotic indian
> system.
Very true! After centuries of invasions and rule by Muslims and
Christians, true Hindus have been reduced to a minority in Bharat.
Jai Maharaj, Jyotishi
Om Shanti
hari....@indero.com
" After centuries of invasions and rule by Muslims and
, true Hindus have been reduced to a minority in Bharat."
What a laugh, jay stevens,aka dr. jai etc. sits thousands of km away
preaching to real indians about how to be real indians and hindus.
He is not indian, he is american and always a citizen and resident of
that country.
It is time to give up the history excuses for current indian failures.
A hindu majority votes to maintain the current constitution.
What jay stevens,aka dr. jai etc. is preaching to real indians and
hindus is india should adopt the views of a radical fringe.
harmony
<use...@mantra.com and/or www.mantra.com/jai (Dr. Jai Maharaj)> wrote in
message news:20100506Ju5IZZP35s1E5O4YJdCzId7@Y3F87...
meateater steelclaws does not get it.
and/or www.mantra.com/jai
"harmony" <a...@hotmail.com> posted:
> Dr. Jai Maharaj posted:
>
> > In article <4be3553b$0$12456$bbae...@news.suddenlink.net>,
> > "harmony" <a...@hotmail.com> posted:
> >>
> >> hindus of current india are a confused, disoriented people, thanks to
> >> communists and their maoists, congressis and their goondas, kirastanistas
> >> and their inquistadoras, mohamadism and their terrorist, the media and
> >> their
> >> masters described per preceding. hindus are locked out of the chaotic
> >> indian
> >> system.
> > Very true! After centuries of invasions and rule by Muslims and
> > Christians, true Hindus have been reduced to a minority in Bharat.
> >
> > Jai Maharaj, Jyotishi
> > Om Shanti
> meateater steelclaws does not get it.
Any neurologist who has actually studied nutrition can attest to the
fact that the meat-eating habit is causatively related to cognitive
problems.
Mr.Smartypants
Jai Maharaj) wrote:
> In article <4be4b43d$0$26973$bbae4...@news.suddenlink.net>,> > > In article <4be3553b$0$12456$bbae4...@news.suddenlink.net>,
> > > "harmony" <a...@hotmail.com> posted:
>
> > >> hindus of current india are a confused, disoriented people, thanks to
> > >> communists and their maoists, congressis and their goondas, kirastanistas
> > >> and their inquistadoras, mohamadism and their terrorist, the media and
> > >> their
> > >> masters described per preceding. hindus are locked out of the chaotic
> > >> indian
> > >> system.
> > > Very true! After centuries of invasions and rule by Muslims and
> > > Christians, true Hindus have been reduced to a minority in Bharat.
>
> > > Jai Maharaj, Jyotishi
> > > Om Shanti
> > meateater steelclaws does not get it.
>
> Any neurologist who has actually studied nutrition can attest to the
> fact that the meat-eating habit is causatively related to cognitive
> problems.
>
> Jai Maharaj, Jyotishi
Dairy users show an average 4 points lower IQ.
Visit http://www.notmilk.com for dairy info from A to Z.
and/or www.mantra.com/jai
"Mr.Smartypants" <bc...@canada.com> posted:
> Dr. Jai Maharaj posted:
>
> > In article <4be4b43d$0$26973$bbae4...@news.suddenlink.net>,
> > =A0"harmony" <a...@hotmail.com> posted:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > Dr. Jai Maharaj posted:
> >
> > > > In article <4be3553b$0$12456$bbae4...@news.suddenlink.net>,
> > > > "harmony" <a...@hotmail.com> posted:
> >
> o
> > > >> communists and their maoists, congressis and their goondas, kirastan=
> istas
> > > >> and their inquistadoras, mohamadism and their terrorist, the media a=
> nd
> > > >> their
> > > >> masters described per preceding. hindus are locked out of the chaoti=
> c
> > > >> indian
> > > >> system.
> > > > Very true! After centuries of invasions and rule by Muslims and
> > > > Christians, true Hindus have been reduced to a minority in Bharat.
> >
> > > > Jai Maharaj, Jyotishi
> > > > Om Shanti
> >
> > > meateater steelclaws does not get it.
> > Any neurologist who has actually studied nutrition can attest to the
> > fact that the meat-eating habit is causatively related to cognitive
> > problems.
> >
> > Jai Maharaj, Jyotishi
> > Om Shanti
> Dairy users show an average 4 points lower IQ.
> Visit http://www.notmilk.com for dairy info from A to Z.
Dairy products are animal source items, so that makes sense.
Steelclaws
> meateater steelclaws does not get it.
harmony with reading comprehension problems seriously does not
understand what is being said. The Gadhimai festival is a Hindu
festival in NEPAL - get it finally, NEPAL - so Indian problems are not
relevant.
Gee, you really are what you eat, vegetable!
Fred C. Dobbs
> On May 8, 1:45 am, "harmony"<a...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> meateater steelclaws does not get it.
>
> harmony with reading comprehension problems seriously does not
> understand what is being said.
"harmony" (not the bitch's real name) with reading comprehension
problems is an HIV-propagating whore.
Fred C. Dobbs
> "Steelclaws"<tenqu...@hotmail.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:02dde018-2430-4b61...@o8g2000yqo.googlegroups.com...
> On May 6, 6:45 pm, "Fred C. Dobbs"<fred.c.do...@earthlink.neat>
> wrote:
>> On 6/5/2006 5:05 AM, Jay Stevens - *not* a doctor, *not* a Hindoo - lied:
>>
>>> WHY HINDUS DON'T EAT MEAT
>>
>> Many Hindus *DO* eat meat, Stevens.
>
> Check out the Hindu Gadhimai festival of Nepal:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gadhimai_festival
>
> Quite an amount of animals sacrificed. Also goat meat shortage
> predicted due to the 5 million attendees consuming it.
>
> I bet the NTS fallacy will be employed by those who claim Hindus don't
> eat meat.
>
> ---------------------
> hindus of current india are a confused, disoriented people,
You are not Indian and you're not a Hindoo. You're talking stuff you
don't know. In other words, you're spouting bullshit - as usual.
Oh, and your name isn't "harmony", either - that's just the kind of
predictable handle a goofy new-age fake like you /would/ adopt.
Fred C. Dobbs
Bullshit.
Fred C. Dobbs
>[a steaming load of crap]
In fact, many Hindus *do* eat meat. They eat it because it is
nutritious and it tastes good.
Some Hindus also facilitate the consumption of beef by Muslims:
"Where's the beef? Indians don't want to know"
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-india-cows-20100503,0,7142346.story
"Most Indian politicians don't discuss the thriving business of cow
smuggling from Hindu-majority India, where the animals are revered, to
Muslim-majority Bangladesh, where many people enjoy beef."
"harmony" - not the goofy new-age twat's real name - doesn't know
anything about this, because she doesn't know anything about India. She
likes to bullshit and pretend she does know about India, but she doesn't.
idd
>> In article<4be3553b$0$12456$bbae4...@news.suddenlink.net>,
>>
>> Dairy users show an average 4 points lower IQ.
>
> Bullshit.
Wow, you must have been captain of the debate team in school!
--
idd
hab...@anony.net
vegeterian as it takes just one tenth of the land to grow the food.
When new energy sources eg oil come in and more food can be grown
people become meat eaters again.
The vast majority of Hindus are meat eaters
harmony
<use...@mantra.com and/or www.mantra.com/jai (Dr. Jai Maharaj)> wrote in
message news:20100507Q77x51Xp1eaSxoxOc50uE6J@PM37I...
the argument for dairy products is that it is a rcih source of calcium.
one good ladoo of teel (that the hindu eat) gives abundance of easily
digestible calcium, and so does a good bowl of sea weed soup. use soy milk
if you must have milk. and eat a fistful of nuts.
Mr.Smartypants
> <use...@mantra.com and/orwww.mantra.com/jai(Dr. Jai Maharaj)> wrote in
> messagenews:20100507Q77x51Xp1eaSxoxOc50uE6J@PM37I...
>
>
>
>
>
> > In article
> > <f6830332-2042-486a-8906-4ff1bec76...@v29g2000prb.googlegroups.com>,
> > "Mr.Smartypants" <b...@canada.com> posted:
>
> > Dairy products are animal source items, so that makes sense.
>
> > Jai Maharaj, Jyotishi
> > Om Shanti
>
> the argument for dairy products is that it is a rcih source of calcium.
It IS a good source of mostly unusable calcium. In order for calcium
to be absorped to the bone there has to be a good ratio of magnesium
present. Cow milk is very low in magnesium but green leafy veggies
have much better ratio. The ideal is 1mg:2ca
The huge amount of calcium supplied by the recommended daily intake of
dairy is neither absorped to the bone nor can the body eliminate it on
a daily basis in that amount. It becomes arterial plaque.
>
> one good ladoo of teel (that the hindu eat) gives abundance of easily
> digestible calcium, and so does a good bowl of sea weed soup. use soy milk
> if you must have milk. and eat a fistful of nuts.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Fred C. Dobbs
Please tell me you don't /seriously/ think that goofy, *unsupported*
claim about IQ requires any more response than "bullshit". Please.
Fred C. Dobbs
> When a country gets overpopulated the people have to become
> vegeterian as it takes just one tenth of the land to grow the food.
No, they don't have to do that. They have to find more efficient ways
to produce meat, or they have to import it.
P. Rajah
By Ron Schmid, ND
Dr. Weston Price was very interested in vegetarian ideas. Of Vitu Levu,
a large island in the Pacific Ocean, he wrote, �I had hoped to find on
it a district far enough from the sea to make it necessary for the
natives to have lived entirely on land foods� one of the purposes of the
expedition to the South Seas was to find, if possible, plants or fruits
which together, without the use of animal products, were capable of
providing all of the requirements for growth and for maintenance of good
health and a high state of physical efficiency.�
He expressed his �disappointment� that ��I have not found a single group
of primitive racial stock which was building and maintaining excellent
bodies by living entirely on plant foods. I have found in many parts of
the world most devout representatives of modern ethical systems
advocating the restriction of foods to the vegetable products. In every
instance where the groups involved had been long under this teaching, I
found evidence of degeneration.�
Dr. Price�s disappointment that vegan diets are invariably deficient
appears to be echoed in the histories of many of us who follow his
teachings. Who among us has not at some time tried to follow a
vegetarian or near vegetarian regime? Vegan, fruitarian, vegetarian,
ovo-lacto-vegetarian, with or without occasional fish or chicken�it
sometimes seemed we were conditioned to eat as little animal food as we
could get by on. Even after reaching an intellectual understanding of
Price�s work and the critical importance of nutrients, especially
fat-soluble activators, found only in animal foods, we often appear to
be perhaps unconsciously concerned about eating too much of them. Such
concern and an accompanying aversion to eating very much animal food is
most marked, of course, before one learns about Price�s work. Years of
vegetarian or near vegetarian eating result in, to use Dr. Price�s word,
degeneration. How does one recover?
This question applies as well to many of us who may never have
considered ourselves vegetarians. Many people have relied for extended
periods on dairy foods to provide needed nutrients, but because of the
poor quality of commercial dairy products, they provide little in the
way of critical nutrients and typically aggravate allergies and other
chronic problems. Quality raw dairy products are difficult for most
people to obtain. Commercial meats are avoided by most health-conscious
people for obvious reasons, as is any substantial quantity of seafood
because of the mercury content. Thus a dearth of quality animal foods
has been characteristic at one time or another of the diet of many
health seekers.
So it seems to me that most of us do have one degree or another of
�recovery� ahead of us once we come to a realization of the importance
of quality animal foods. And because we often tend to think even then
that a little animal food is enough in a �balanced� diet, we may without
realizing it never consume enough animal fat, with its activators and
other nutrients, to reach robust good health.
According to Dr. Price, the most critical nutrients were those found in
the fats of wild animals or grassfed domestic animals and their milk
products. These nutrients include vitamins A and D, EPA, DHA and other
fatty acids, activator X and perhaps other unknown nutrients. Along with
enzymes supplied only in raw and fermented foods, these are the
nutrients that are most lacking in modern diets.
Misunderstanding surrounding vitamin D is typical of the confusion most
people have about animal source nutrients. Dr. Price wrote, �There is
misapprehension with regard to the possibility that humans may obtain
enough of the vitamin D group of activators from our modern plant foods
or from sunshine (my emphasis)�there are known to be at least eight D
factors that have been definitely isolated and twelve that have been
reported or partially isolated.� Misapprehension today generally goes
much further. Even people who are aware of Dr. Price�s work often
believe that optimal amounts of vitamin D can be obtained from exposure
to sunlight. And just as most have been intimidated by the media and the
medics into hedging their bets when it comes to the consumption of
cholesterol-rich animal foods, most shy away from all but the smallest
amounts of vitamin D supplementation.
This may be why I have always found cod liver oil to be the most
valuable single food supplement most people can take. I believe that
many people who profess to eat �the Weston Price way� have in fact never
fully recovered from the deficiencies of their vegetarian or
near-vegetarian years. By richly supplying vitamin D and other
fat-soluble nutrients, cod liver oil hastens recovery.
How much vitamin D might be optimal is somewhat controversial but the
question is central to a discussion about recovering from vegetarianism.
Modern diets are notoriously low in vitamin D, often providing not even
the minimal 400 IU per day recommended by the government. Scores of
recent studies, however, have indicated that much higher amounts protect
against a host of chronic diseases, including cancer. Something of a
consensus has recently emerged among scientists who study the issue that
about three or four thousand IUs per day may be optimal.
This is the amount provided in about one tablespoon of high-vitamin cod
liver oil � that is, cod liver oil which contains the full complement of
vitamins A and D naturally found in cod liver oil. Most cod liver oils
have had a large fraction of these vitamins removed in processing, for
reasons ranging from convenience in manufacturing to kowtowing to the
medical profession�s scare tactics about the alleged dangers of excess
amounts of vitamins A and D. Confusion results because fairly low levels
of the synthetic versions of vitamins A and D may indeed be toxic. The
natural forms as provided in cod liver oil, however, are safe in
substantial doses.
One tablespoon of high vitamin cod liver oil provides about 35,000 IUs
of vitamin A and 3,500 IUs of vitamin D. This is a reasonable amount for
most individuals. I have used two to four times that amount myself for
extended periods, as have many of my patients, with many benefits and no
apparent harm. Blood tests for vitamin D levels have remained in
reasonable ranges. Studies published in the 1930s, when vitamin D
therapy was commonly used in the treatment of arthritis and other
conditions, indicated that doses far in excess of 20,000 IU of natural
vitamin D per day were non-toxic. It appears that the problem of vitamin
D toxicity, and that of vitamins in general, has been greatly exaggerated.
* * *
Many people are eating diets that are based on vegetables, fruits, and
grains, and include modest amounts of meat, seafood, fowl, eggs and
perhaps some raw dairy. Such natural foods diets seem reasonable enough,
and fit well with the concept, promoted by many popular politically
correct articles and books, that our ancestors ate a diet that was low
in fat and moderate in animal protein, and had lots of fiber. Such a
dietary approach certainly beats scotch, pasta and cheesecake, and many
people feel considerably better when adopting it.
But it is not a diet that is built to last, because the centerpiece of a
truly healthy diet must be animal foods. That means a substantial
portion of meat, seafood, fowl, eggs or raw dairy at just about every
meal. That is how one recovers from vegetarianism and builds lasting
health and strength. It is not necessary to eat a lot of meat in such a
regime, or any at all for that matter, if grassfed raw dairy is used
liberally. In fact, because things go best when a large part of the
animal fat and protein is consumed raw, grassfed raw dairy is especially
important for those who do not eat raw or undercooked meat.
Dr. Price�s work makes it abundantly clear that indigenous people
everywhere emphasized the consumption of raw or undercooked animal
foods. Such food is nearly or completely lacking in most diets today.
Along with the fat-soluble activators, raw fat and protein are in my
opinion essential for robust health. Native diets were full of guts,
grease and enzymes, the latter found only in raw foods, as well as the
fat-soluble activators. Grassfed raw milk provides all of these
nutrients in abundance.
Fiber is one thing largely animal food diets provide very little of. We
have all heard how critical fiber is for intestinal health. It is not
uncommon to become constipated when adopting an animal food-rich diet
while cutting back on vegetables, fruits and grains. How do we deal with
this?
A reasonably bulky stool is necessary if one is to have regular and easy
bowel movements. The obvious and usually recommended way to achieve this
is indeed to eat a high-fiber diet. The other, little understood way,
the way followed by the native cultures Price studied, was to eat a diet
rich in fermented foods and raw animal protein and fat.
Fermented animal foods such as clabbered milk and yogurt and kefir made
from raw milk, and fermented vegetables, support the proliferation in
the intestinal tract of large quantities of beneficial bacteria. These
bacteria bulk up the stools, resulting in easy elimination even on diets
containing very little fiber. It takes some time for this buildup to
occur, often several weeks, and a good probiotic helps this process. My
patients often benefit from using psyllium powder to maintain bulk
during the transition to a high animal food diet.
Dr. Francis Pottenger wrote about another aspect of the influence of raw
animal foods on intestinal health, explaining that raw food consists
mostly of hydrophilic colloids. Hydrophylic means water loving, and a
colloid is a suspension of solid particles in a gel-like fluid. Eaten
uncooked, these colloids absorb large quantities of digestive juices,
forming a gelatinous mass that maintains the mucosa of the stomach and
digestive tract in a healthy state.
The heat of cooking precipitates out colloids, making them hydrophobic
(water hating). The hydration capacity of the colloids is decreased, and
they become less able to absorb digestive juices. Colloidal cellulose
and pectins in plants can withstand greater temperatures without being
precipitated than can proteins; this is why cooking has a less
pronounced effect on the digestibility of plants than on that of animal
foods. In modern diets, most people get it backwards, emphasizing eating
vegetables raw while cooking all animal foods.
In Dr. Pottenger�s ten-year cat study, cooked-food cats were
consistently found at autopsy to have much longer intestines than
raw-food cats. Intestines of the former had many distensions and general
lack of tone; the length was often up to twice that of raw-food cats. A
similar process may be at work in humans as well. The argument has been
made that the length of the human digestive tract demonstrates that
humans are best suited for a vegetarian diet, because the remnants of
the digestion of animal flesh may putrefy when stagnant in the rather
long human intestines. The eating of refined and overcooked foods may
indeed contribute to that length; problems allegedly due to flesh too
long in the intestines may in fact be due to intestines that are too
long. Price�s natives ate a substantial portion of their proteins and
fats raw, and suffered no such problems.
* * *
Dr. Price studied native people from the far north country of Alaska and
Canada to the equatorial regions of Africa and the South Pacific, from
the mountains of Switzerland to the jungles of the Amazon. He
encountered a tremendous range of diets, all based on what food was
locally available and upon wisdom passed down for hundreds of
generations. From the information he compiled, we are left to draw
conclusions about how to select foods today to restore and maintain health.
This is no easy task. For some 25 years, I have sought to understand
Price�s work and apply it in my own. Here are a few observations I have
made about recovering from vegetarianism and the pervasive influence
vegetarian thinking has had on most of us.
* When it comes to quality grassfed animal food, more is better.
One need not fear eating too much, and a substantial part is best eaten
raw or undercooked.
* Grains are a relatively new food for humans. Only a few of the
cultures Price studied ate grains. When eaten, grains were very
carefully and traditionally prepared. Grain foods that do not meet this
criteria are best avoided. Many people feel best by simply eliminating
all grain foods.
* Almost every individual does well with the right kind and
quantities of grassfed raw dairy foods for him or her, and with
fermented vegetables.
* The right special foods and supplemental nutrients for the
individual result in a much more rapid and thorough recovery. These
include cod liver oil, X-factor type butter oil, probiotics, organs and
glands, and other nutrients to complement the individual�s diet and
alleviate specific medical problems.
* The help of a practitioner who understands Dr. Price�s work is
invaluable. There is no one-size-fits-all diet you will find in any book
by any �expert� (an expert being, in Will Rogers� words, somebody who
wrote a book and lives at least fifty miles away). Your needs are your
own, based on your likes and dislikes, background and current condition,
what�s available and practical for you, and many other intangibles that
can only be understood in the context of a carefully taken medical
history. A good practitioner is a mentor who can help you find the
specific diet, special foods, and nutrients and proportions that are
right for you.
* * *
Think of your health as a dream house that you are at last free to
build, a home that will shelter you for the rest of your life. Imagine
for a moment that Dr. Price is the master designer and teacher who spent
a lifetime studying homes throughout the world to learn the fundamental
principles of house construction, principles which if followed will
enable the home to be sturdy and beautiful. Imagine that your mentor is
the architect who has learned what Dr. Price has taught, and learned
from you just what you want and need, and prepared for you a marvelous
set of blueprints � a detailed plan with which to build.
But imagine too in our little game that the rules say that only you can
be the builder. To make the dream real you must act. To build your dream
house, you would need to find the carpenters, the stone workers, the
artisans to construct the various elements and bring them together. You
would need to learn new things and coordinate the work of many other
people. It might be difficult. But you could do it, certainly, if, say,
your life depended on it.
Building the house of your health is not so different. Here too you will
need to learn new things, adopt new disciplines, and coordinate the work
of others. You�ll need to find the food, and perhaps even the people who
grow the food, to make the house of your health as beautiful, as sturdy,
and as fine as you would like. But it shouldn�t be so hard � since your
life does indeed depend on it.
About the Author...
Ron Schmid, ND, has practiced naturopathic medicine since 1981. He
served for two years as Chief Medical Officer and Clinic Director at the
University of Bridgeport College of Naturopathic Medicine. He is the
author of Traditional Foods Are Your Best Medicine, and The Untold Story
of Milk. He is on the honorary board of the Weston A. Price Foundation
and has written for Wise Traditions, the quarterly journal of the
Foundation. As well as running his own naturopathic clinic, Dr Ron makes
100% additive-free nutrients, formulas and special foods.
P. Rajah
There was no difference in IQ between strict vegetarians and those who
classed themselves as veggie but still ate fish or chicken.
However, *vegans* - vegetarians who also avoid dairy products - scored
_significantly lower_, averaging an IQ score of 95 at the age of 10.
Read more:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-422756/Vegetarians-intelligent-says-study.html
dh
Then they are contributing to life for future animals raised
for food. When the lives are of positive value, what's wrong with
contributing to them? Advocates of the gross mi$nomer "animal
rights" are opposed to considering the animals' lives because
considering when they have lives of positive value works against
their objective to eliminate them:
_________________________________________________________
"No zygotes, animals, people, or any other living thing
benefits from coming into existence. No farm animals
benefit from farming." - Goo
"Causing animals to be born and "get to experience life"
. . . is no mitigation at all for killing them." - Goo
"It is morally wrong, in an absolute sense - unjust, in other
words - if humans kill animals they don't need to kill, i.e. not
in self defense." - Goo
"the moral harm caused by killing them is greater in magnitude
than ANY benefit they might derive from "decent lives" - Goo
"When considering your food choices ethically, assign
ZERO weight to the morally empty fact that choosing to
eat meat causes animals to be bred into existence." - Goo
"no matter how "decent" the conditions are, the deliberate
killing of the animals erases all of it." - Goo
"It is not "good"for the animals that they exist, no matter
how pleasant the condition of their existence." - Goo
"It is not "good for them" to exist, no matter how pleasant
the existence." - Goo
"it is not "better" that the animal exist, no matter
its quality of live" - Goo
���������������������������������������������������������
but afaik ONLY eliminationists have reason to oppose
consideration of the animals, because only they have everything
to lose by doing so. Unless you think Hindus do too, which maybe
you do. Then again maybe it's not really a Hindu thing but just
more misnomer huggers who happen to be Hindu... The dishonest
creature who called herself "pearl" used to try to pretend that
we are forbidden from eating meat in the Bible, though it clearly
tells us that we can eat meat in a number of places.
idd
It was not unsupported, the citation was
"Visit http://www.notmilk.com for dairy info from A to Z."
I don't know enough to agree or disagree, but you are hardly
giving a reasoned discussion. At least have the decency to
compose a rebuttal or just don't reply.
--
idd
idd
meat-industry group which is funded by meat
producers.
They have a strong interest in curbing the rise
of vegetarianism, and are not at all authoritative
on health matters.
--
idd
idd
Forgot to add:
http://unreasonable.org/node/1642
--
idd
and/or www.mantra.com/jai
According to studies, vegetarians have better health than
people that eat meat. They have lower rates of coronary
artery disease, gallstones, cancer (particularly lung and
colon cancer), kidney stones, colon disease, diabetes and
high blood pressure. It has been shown that sometimes a
vegetarian diet can help cure these diseases. A
vegetarian is also less likely to be overweight than a
non-vegetarian.
In 1961, the Journal of the American Medical Association
stated that ninety to ninety-seven percent of heart
disease, the cause of more than half the deaths in the
United States, could be prevented by a vegetarian diet.
The American Heart Association report states, "In well-
documented population studies using standard methods of
diet and coronary disease assessment"evidence suggests
that a high-saturated-fat diet is an essential factor for
a high incidence of coronary heart disease."
In 1990, the British Medical Journal Lancet reported on a
study by Dr Dean Ornish of the University of California.
Dr Ornish found that a vegetarian diet reversed clogging
of the arteries in patients with serious heart disease.
In 1990, Dr Walter Willet, who conducted a study of diet
and colon cancer, said, "If you step back and look at the
data, the optimum amount of red meat you eat should be
zero."
The National Academy of Science reported in 1983 that
"people may be able to prevent many common cancers by
eating less fatty meats and more vegetables and grain."
The USDA recommends that people reduce saturated fat and
cholesterol, which are in high amounts in animal
products, and low in vegetarian diets.
In his Notes on the Causation of Cancer, Rollo Russell
writes, "I have found of twenty-five nations eating flesh
largely, nineteen had a high cancer rate and only one had
a low rate, and that of thirty-five nations eating little
or no flesh, none had a high rate."
Various studies have shown that vegetarians have lower
blood pressure than non-vegetarians.
Vegetarians have much lower cholesterol levels than
people that eat meat. Heart disease is found much less in
vegetarians. Studies have also shown that vegetarians
have up to half the cancer rate than those of non-
vegetarians. Cases of breast cancer are much lower in
countries that have low meat diets.
Vegetarians eat more antioxidants such as vitamin C,
vitamin E, beta-carotenes and phytochemicals.
Phyotochemicals are components in plants that help to
prevent disease. Antioxidants decrease the chance of
getting heart disease, cancer and other diseases.
Eating red meat increases the chance of dying from cancer
of the breast and colon, heart disease and strokes. Meat
eaters have much higher rates of cancer than vegetarians.
Cancer and cardiovascular diseases are linked to diets
with a high amount of saturated fat (meat) and with a low
amount of fiber (meat).
Animal products are high in sodium, which causes the
blood to retain water and also causes plaque to build up
in the arteries, lowering the flow of blood, which are
major causes of high blood pressure.
According to a study done in England for 12 years of
5,015 meat eaters and 6,115 vegetarians, it was found
that vegetarians had 40% less chance of getting cancer.
According to William Castelli, MD, director of the
Framingham Heart Study, vegetarians live three to six
years longer than meat eaters. He said, "vegetarians have
the best diet. They have the lowest rate of coronary
disease of any group in the country and they have a
fraction of our heart attack rate and they have only 40%
of our cancer rate."
Grains and plant foods contain fiber, while animal
products contain almost none. Because fiber is necessary
for proper stool production, lack of proper fiber
accounts for societies with meat-based diets to have
higher cases of colon cancer. The main reasons why people
need to take laxatives is because of lack of fiber in
their diet and not drinking enough water.
There were guidelines published in Circulation: Journal
of the American Heart Association (AHA). These guidelines
were compiled by members of the AHA's Nutrition Committee
with the cooperation of the American Cancer Society,
National Institutes of Health, and the American Academy
of Pediatrics.
Richard J Deckelbaum, MD, a co-author of the journal
article, is a professor of nutrition at Columbia
University and a member of the AHA Nutrition Committee.
Edward A Fisher, MD, PhD, a co-author of the article, is
director of lipoprotein research at New York's Mount
Sinai Cardiovascular Institute.
Their recommendations are that a healthy diet consists of
getting 30% of total calories from fat and no more than
10% of total calories from saturated fat, and 55% of
total calories should come from complex carbohydrates
such as grains, cereals, vegetables and fruits. It is
also recommended that a person eat only enough calories
to maintain their body weight. Problems come from eating
too much fat, especially saturated fats from meat and
eggs, eating too many calories, and getting too much
calories from salt and sugar.
Because people in the US eat good amounts of meat,
Americans eat five times as much protein as is
recommended. An excess of protein can leach calcium from
the bones, which is major cause of bone disorder.
It is important to get enough leafy vegetables that are
high in antioxidants, which are good for overall health.
Some Important Guidelines
1 Eat a variety of foods.
2 Mainly eat foods from plant sources.
3 Don't eat too much salt or sugar.
4 Eat at least six servings of grains, breads and pastas.
5 Eat at least five servings of vegetables and fruits.
6 Avoid foods high in fat, especially those coming from animal sources.
Source - http://www.vegetarian-restaurants.net/OtherInfo/HealthBenefit.htm
Visit the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine
for excellent food recommendations:
Jai Maharaj, Jyotishi
Om Shanti
o Not for commercial use. Solely to be fairly used for the educational
purposes of research and open discussion. The contents of this post may not
have been authored by, and do not necessarily represent the opinion of the
poster. The contents are protected by copyright law and the exemption for
fair use of copyrighted works.
o If you send private e-mail to me, it will likely not be read,
considered or answered if it does not contain your full legal name, current
e-mail and postal addresses, and live-voice telephone number.
o Posted for information and discussion. Views expressed by others are
not necessarily those of the poster who may or may not have read the article.
FAIR USE NOTICE: This article may contain copyrighted material the use of
which may or may not have been specifically authorized by the copyright
owner. This material is being made available in efforts to advance the
understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic,
democratic, scientific, social, and cultural, etc., issues. It is believed
that this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as
provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title
17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without
profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included
information for research, comment, discussion and educational purposes by
subscribing to USENET newsgroups or visiting web sites. For more information
go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
If you wish to use copyrighted material from this article for purposes of
your own that go beyond 'fair use', you must obtain permission from the
copyright owner.
Since newsgroup posts are being removed
by forgery by one or more net terrorists,
this post may be reposted several times.
Fred C. Dobbs
> Health Benefits of Being a Vegetarian
None.
Fred C. Dobbs
> The Weston A. Price Foundation is a well-known
> meat-industry group which is funded by meat
> producers.
No, it is not.
Fred C. Dobbs
> On Sat, 08 May 2010 20:34:37 GMT, hab...@anony.net wrote:
>
>> When a country gets overpopulated the people have to become
>> vegeterian as it takes just one tenth of the land to grow the food.
>> When new energy sources eg oil come in and more food can be grown
>> people become meat eaters again.
>> The vast majority of Hindus are meat eaters
>
> Then they are contributing to life for future animals
Meaningless blabber. It is not "good" for animals that they come into
existence. People who consume meat are not doing anything "good" for
animals by consuming meat.
Fred C. Dobbs
> On 2010-05-09, Fred C. Dobbs<fred.c...@earthlink.neat> wrote:
>> On 5/8/2010 11:28 AM, idd wrote:
>>> On 2010-05-08, Fred C. Dobbs<fred.c...@earthlink.neat> wrote:
>>>>> In article<4be3553b$0$12456$bbae4...@news.suddenlink.net>,
>>>>>
>>>>> Dairy users show an average 4 points lower IQ.
>>>>
>>>> Bullshit.
>>>
>>> Wow, you must have been captain of the debate team in school!
>>
>> Please tell me you don't /seriously/ think that goofy, *unsupported*
>> claim about IQ requires any more response than "bullshit". Please.
>
> It was not unsupported, the citation was
> "Visit http://www.notmilk.com for dairy info from A to Z."
No support for the claim at that site. That's a propaganda site. They
don't support the claim any more than the shrill idiotic food Nazi who
posted the claim here.
Mr.Smartypants
wrote:
> On 5/9/2010 4:49 PM, Dr. Jai Maharaj wrote:
>
> > Health Benefits of Being a Vegetarian
>
> None.
Why do you insist on making a fool of yourself, Boobs?
Fred C. Dobbs
>> On 5/8/2010 11:28 AM, idd wrote:
>>> On 2010-05-08, Fred C. Dobbs<fred.c...@earthlink.neat> wrote:
>>>>> In article<4be3553b$0$12456$bbae4...@news.suddenlink.net>,
>>>>>
>>>>> Dairy users show an average 4 points lower IQ.
>>>>
>>>> Bullshit.
>>>
>>> Wow, you must have been captain of the debate team in school!
>>
>> Please tell me you don't /seriously/ think that goofy, *unsupported*
>> claim about IQ requires any more response than "bullshit". Please.
>
> It was not unsupported, the citation was
> "Visit http://www.notmilk.com for dairy info from A to Z."
There is nothing at that site that either supports or even states the
claim that dairy consumers have a lower IQ. The person who posted the
claim lied in offering that propaganda site as a source for his bullshit
claim.
idd
> On May 9, 9:13?pm, "Fred C. Dobbs" <fred.c.do...@earthlink.neat>
He's a troll, it's his nature.
--
idd
Fred C. Dobbs
> On May 9, 9:13 pm, "Fred C. Dobbs"<fred.c.do...@earthlink.neat>
> wrote:
>> On 5/9/2010 4:49 PM, Dr. Jai Maharaj wrote:
>>
>>> Health Benefits of Being a Vegetarian
>>
>> None.
>
No health benefits of being a vegetarian.
idd
Simple contradiction is not a substitute for debate, troll.
You have contributed nothing to the discussion, and your
unfounded assertions are meaningless.
--
idd
Fred C. Dobbs
> On 2010-05-10, Fred C. Dobbs<fred.c...@earthlink.neat> wrote:
>> On 5/9/2010 3:35 PM, idd wrote:
>>> The Weston A. Price Foundation is a well-known
>>> meat-industry group which is funded by meat
>>> producers.
>>
>> No, it is not.
>
> Simple contradiction is not a substitute for debate,
You made an *unsupported* assertion about the Weston A. Price
Foundation, stupid troll. Support your claim that it is a
"meat-industry group" and that it is "funded by meat producers".
In fact, you can't support it - it is just a statement of your ideology,
not a factual statement. You stupid troll.
idd
You choose to ignore links you don't like and then claim "unsupported".
You're not even a convincing troll.
Bugger off, dufus.
--
idd
Fred C. Dobbs
> On 2010-05-10, Fred C. Dobbs<fred.c...@earthlink.neat> wrote:
>> On 5/10/2010 9:17 AM, idd wrote:
>>> On 2010-05-10, Fred C. Dobbs<fred.c...@earthlink.neat> wrote:
>>>> On 5/9/2010 3:35 PM, idd wrote:
>>>>> The Weston A. Price Foundation is a well-known
>>>>> meat-industry group which is funded by meat
>>>>> producers.
>>>>
>>>> No, it is not.
>>>
>>> Simple contradiction is not a substitute for debate,
>>
>> You made an *unsupported* assertion about the Weston A. Price
>> Foundation, stupid troll. Support your claim that it is a
>> "meat-industry group" and that it is "funded by meat producers".
>>
>> In fact, you can't support it - it is just a statement of your ideology,
>> not a factual statement. You stupid troll.
>
> You choose to ignore links you don't like
There was no link, you fucking extremist troll. There was only your
empty, ideological assertion about the Price Foundation. Now you're
lying in addition to be a provocateur, trying to imply you supplied a
link to support your bullshit ideological claim.
You really blow, girl. You're trying to be a good vegetarian extremist
troll, and you just blow at it.
idd
>
> There was no link, you fucking extremist troll. There was only your
> empty, ideological assertion about the Price Foundation. Now you're
> lying in addition to be a provocateur, trying to imply you supplied a
> link to support your bullshit ideological claim.
>
Liar.
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.religion.vaisnava/msg/6b00960d44b03eaf
--
idd
Fred C. Dobbs
> On 2010-05-10, Fred C. Dobbs<fred.c...@earthlink.neat> wrote:
>>
>> There was no link, you fucking extremist troll. There was only your
>> empty, ideological assertion about the Price Foundation. Now you're
>> lying in addition to be a provocateur, trying to imply you supplied a
>> link to support your bullshit ideological claim.
>>
>
> Liar.
No. The bullshit in your original post, contained in message ID
84orm5...@mid.individual.net, did not contain any link to support
your extremist propaganda claim about the Weston A. Price Foundation.
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.religion.vaisnava/msg/6b00960d44b03eaf
>
The link you included in that *different* post does not, of course,
support your claim. In fact, you lying extremist, it doesn't even
*contain* your claim. Your bullshit claim - that the Weston A. Price
Foundation is a "well-known meat-industry group which is funded by meat
producers" - is neither stated nor supported on that site.
That site is *SHIT* - it's nothing but a discussion page containing
posts by other dummies like you who are *ignorant* of anything
pertaining to nutrition or science.
You are completely full of shit, troll. You are full of shit, and
utterly talentless as a troll.
--
Any more lip out of you and I'll haul off and let you have it...if you
know what's good for you, you won't monkey around with Fred C. Dobbs
Fred C. Dobbs
You're the troll. This is very clearly established.
idd
> On 5/10/2010 10:43 AM, idd wrote:
>> On 2010-05-10, Fred C. Dobbs<fred.c...@earthlink.neat> wrote:
>>>
>>> There was no link, you fucking extremist troll. There was only your
>>> empty, ideological assertion about the Price Foundation. Now you're
>>> lying in addition to be a provocateur, trying to imply you supplied a
>>> link to support your bullshit ideological claim.
>>>
>>
>> Liar.
>
> No. The bullshit in your original post, contained in message ID
> 84orm5...@mid.individual.net, did not contain any link to support
> your extremist propaganda claim about the Weston A. Price Foundation.
>
>
>> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.religion.vaisnava/msg/6b00960d44b03eaf
>>
>
> The link you included in that *different* post
>
Oh,you mean the follow up in which I provided the link I initially forgot.
Wow, you are one desperate little jackass!
:)
>does not, of course,
> support your claim. In fact, you lying extremist, it doesn't even
> *contain* your claim. Your bullshit claim - that the Weston A. Price
> Foundation is a "well-known meat-industry group which is funded by meat
> producers" - is neither stated nor supported on that site.
>
There are links on that page, which if you were interested in actually
discussing the matter (vs being a failed troll, which of course is what
you are) you might have followed. IOW, the citation is quite adequate.
[remainder of mindless ranting snipped]
--
idd
idd
Incorrect, as always.
In fact you are not even a troll, but a failed troll.
Pathetic.
--
idd
Fred C. Dobbs
> On 2010-05-10, Fred C. Dobbs<fred.c...@earthlink.not> wrote:
>> On 5/10/2010 10:43 AM, idd wrote:
>>> On 2010-05-10, Fred C. Dobbs<fred.c...@earthlink.neat> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> There was no link, you fucking extremist troll. There was only your
>>>> empty, ideological assertion about the Price Foundation. Now you're
>>>> lying in addition to be a provocateur, trying to imply you supplied a
>>>> link to support your bullshit ideological claim.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Liar.
>>
>> No. The bullshit in your original post, contained in message ID
>> 84orm5...@mid.individual.net, did not contain any link to support
>> your extremist propaganda claim about the Weston A. Price Foundation.
>>
>>
>>> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.religion.vaisnava/msg/6b00960d44b03eaf
>>>
>>
>> support your claim. In fact, you lying extremist, it doesn't even
>> *contain* your claim.
You failed to address this, little talentless trolling liar. Your link
that you claim is "support" for your claim doesn't even contain your
claim, let alone any support for it. You lied. You are a chronic liar.
>> Your bullshit claim - that the Weston A. Price
>> Foundation is a "well-known meat-industry group which is funded by meat
>> producers" - is neither stated nor supported on that site.
>>
>
> There are links on that page,
*NONE* of which point to a documented claim that the Weston A. Price
Foundation is "a meat-industry group which is funded by meat
producers." I looked at all of them. When you're asked to support a
claim, asshole, you're expected to support it with *direct* evidence.
Sending people off on a wild goose chase is not supporting your claim.
All we find on the page you offered as "support" for your *bullshit*
claim is ideological whining about the Price Foundation:
"Today I got spam from them about it, which prompts me to post a bit
about these shills and quacks."
"...one of the primary groups responsible for spreading some of the
FUD that you may have heard about soy products." ['FUD' - undefined,
but undoubtedly a vegetarian extremist pejorative expression]
"They [WAPF] advocate a diet high in saturated fat..." - unsupported
"WAPF simply denies that such a link [between cholesterol and heart
disease and stroke] exists" - unsupported
"There's a good series of articles about WAPF at vegsource.com" -
No, there isn't.
All the rest is anonymous, unsupported commentary not about the WAPF
itself, but about what "Tom Swiss" has said about WAPF. *Nowhere* on
that page is there any support for *your* hysteria-driven claim about WAPF.
Your claim continues to be unsupported, and it will remain that way.
You have no support for it at all. You're a dietary extremist and
troll, and a liar.
Fred C. Dobbs
> On 2010-05-10, Fred C. Dobbs<fred.c...@earthlink.not> wrote:
>> On 5/9/2010 9:26 PM, idd wrote:
>>> On 2010-05-10, Mr.Smartypants<bunghol...@lycos.com> wrote:
>>>> On May 9, 9:13?pm, "Fred C. Dobbs"<fred.c.do...@earthlink.neat>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> On 5/9/2010 4:49 PM, Dr. Jai Maharaj wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Health Benefits of Being a Vegetarian
>>>>>
>>>>> None.
>>>>
>>>> Why do you insist on making a fool of yourself, Boobs?
>>>>
>>>
>>> He's a troll,
>>
>> You're the troll. This is very clearly established.
>
> Incorrect, as always.
No, it is correct. You are a foodie extremist troll, and thoroughly
talentless at it as well.
idd
It is you who is the liar, as I did quite clearly address your
previously-stated lie. All you can do is repeat the same meaningless
contradictions without an ounce of support for your view.
You are unworthy of any further consideration, and I will no longer
read the pathetic braying of such a jackass.
PLONK
--
idd
Mr.Smartypants
No, liar. You are the liar. You offered no support for your hysterical
shrill crap, and you won't offer any - because you cannot.
idd
More unsupported asserions from a braindead, meatbreath troll.
--
idd
Mr.Smartypants
Nope. You did not support your claim about WAPF, and you will not
because you cannot. You are a troll and a liar.
Mr.Smartypants
wrote:
> On 5/9/2010 9:26 PM, idd wrote:
>
> >> On May 9, 9:13?pm, "Fred C. Dobbs"<fred.c.do...@earthlink.neat>
> >> wrote:
> >>> On 5/9/2010 4:49 PM, Dr. Jai Maharaj wrote:
>
> >>>> Health Benefits of Being a Vegetarian
>
> >>> None.
>
> >> Why do you insist on making a fool of yourself, Boobs?
>
> > He's a troll,
>
> You're the troll. This is very clearly established.
No Goobs, YOU are the troll as evidenced by your many nyms and
inability to have a discussion with *anyone* on *any* topic without
coming completely unhinged.
Fred C. Dobbs
> On May 10, 12:28 pm, "Fred C. Dobbs"<fred.c.do...@earthlink.not>
> wrote:
>> On 5/9/2010 9:26 PM, idd wrote:
>>
>>> On 2010-05-10, Mr.Smartypants<bunghole-jon...@lycos.com> wrote:
>>>> On May 9, 9:13?pm, "Fred C. Dobbs"<fred.c.do...@earthlink.neat>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> On 5/9/2010 4:49 PM, Dr. Jai Maharaj wrote:
>>
>>>>>> Health Benefits of Being a Vegetarian
>>
>>>>> None.
>>
>>>> Why do you insist on making a fool of yourself, Boobs?
>>
>>> He's a troll,
>>
>> You're the troll. This is very clearly established.
>
>
No, *she* and *you* are the trolls, Runny.