Aetherous

I've personally found pork to nourish the blood best of all the meats. This was tested when I was a student, where I over studied, and got very strong symptoms of blood deficiency...and when having pork patties in my diet as part of breakfast sandwiches, the symptoms (of liver and heart blood deficiency) went away. Beef, chicken, eggs, etc, didn't really have a noticeable effect for me, but maybe beef if eaten as a steak is good for some reason...ground beef not really. Just my experience. There are also blood nourishing herbs, which practitioners can help you with. Herbs are stronger than foods, both for positive effects and negative ones, so it's helpful to have a clean diet in the first place so that the nourishing herbs don't lead to phlegm, dampness, and food stagnation. Important to chew foods fully, too. If adding herbs to your foods, as they do sometimes in Chinese culture, I think adding some dang gui (angelica slices) to things like chicken soup isn't a bad idea, but shu di huang (prepared rehmannia, or any kind of it that looks black) is something that's overused even by TCM practitioners...it's super cloying, to the point where some great Chinese practitioners have said that it causes all other herbs to not work properly. And the most important thing: avoid the things that damage the blood. For instance, "too much looking" damages the blood. I think this would also include "too much thinking", such as overstudying, etc. Staying up late at night, I think, damages the blood...so going to bed earlier and having good sleep is good. Staying hydrated to some extent will help maintain blood levels (you're dehydrated if you experience thirst, or if your pee is anything more than very light yellow). Think of it like this: if there's a hole in your garden hose, less water will come out of the end because it'll be leaking out of the hole. You can add more water into the hose by turning it up, but that'll just cause more to leave the hole (such as increasing blood through herbs). Alternatively, you can plug the hole completely so that the water isn't leaking out of the side of the hose (addressing the actual cause of the blood deficiency). So, the "hole" isn't a hole in your arteries or something, but is a metaphor for whatever is decreasing the blood. Take care of what's decreasing it, and really you don't even need to "turn up the faucet" or eat meat or take blood nourishing herbs...it'll go back to normal levels, because it won't be getting decreased through lifestyle. Edited to add: also, look up what the hun (the spirit of the liver) does. For instance, planning ahead, imagination, daydreaming (or we could assume, spirit traveling), insight, etc. I think those things use up our blood to an extent, more or less...whereas basically being embodied and not thinking, and not looking outward so much, doesn't drain the blood.

Thanks, I accept you as well. It's my view that none of us go far enough when it comes to this topic. I may end up taking a break, so as to let others have more breathing room so they can feel better speaking their minds...which perhaps would give you some relief. But for the time being, I've had incredibly important things to share here.

So, that's an easy lock em up decision for you. Because it's murder, and you can't have someone murdering other people out there. That's how you view it...but consider for a second that perhaps approximately half of our US population views it differently, myself included. We view the fetus to be just as much of a human being as a 12 year old. We think it's just as bad, and perhaps even worse (due to the innocence involved) when the fetus is murdered...and we do consider it murder, since it's a premeditated taking of a human life. We know it's a human life, not only due to how it looks after a certain stage of development, but also because it has its own heartbeat at 6 weeks, which only living human beings have. We know it's a human life, because if nature is left to take its course and not interfered with violently, that fetus pops out as a baby and lives independently as a fully developed human. You view abortion differently than this, because we've been in a culture that views it differently. Our Supreme Court arbitrarily defined that a human life is only a person at a pretty random stage of its development. We've gotten used to not thinking about this issue, and just go with the flow of society. Our team (I refer to your team, liberals) have certain slogans that have the effect of causing us to not think and question...such as insisting that it's all about "women" and "healthcare". Obviously if you speak against it, you're speaking against women...and then are shunned and scolded. How could you try to infringe on someone's right to "healthcare"?! Just like how in a tribe that hunts people from other tribes and eats them in order to gain their power (cannibalism)...us Americans can look down upon that, because we know that such a thing is wrong and disturbed, and even causes disease for the one who wins and eats. But the person in the tribe grew up with that way of life, and thinks it's not wrong at all. They truly feel and believe differently than us Americans. They think nothing (ethically speaking) of that person dying, nor of the eating of the human flesh. They're not yet enlightened, just like our society is not yet enlightened (due to apathy and ignorance) on the subject of abortion. Apathy and ignorance looks like: maintaining one's ideological position, despite evidence for a more scientific/rational/ethical position being presented. The points being presented aren't addressed by the apathetic, or if they are addressed, it's not done with full honesty. To change one's mind would be too much of a shock for most people in this culture, which has been programmed to believe and feel the way that it does. Because then you'd become one of the bad guys, who the culture mocks/doesn't understand/fears. You'd be lumped into the same category as rednecks, racists, Christians, etc. You'd become one of the rational ones. ...to be clear, I'm not calling you names like, "you're irrational". But I think I'm presenting a perspective which is quite decisive, and can cut through abortionist programming. If abortion were made illegal, and someone did it, I think they'd be a criminal and should be prevented from continuing to do that...perhaps similar to someone who committed manslaughter or murder. I view each baby as a human with the right to life, which isn't yet able to speak up for itself and declare that it wants the be alive, and which can't ask others to stop the mother from killing it. Perhaps, being fully conscious, it wants to. Also...in the case of my own daughter (don't have one yet) or friend murdering a 12 year old. I would think they should be locked up, but of course the original question is meant to pull at the heart strings, because it's someone close to us. Fathers want to protect their daughters, and will do almost anything (even some, to the point of obscuring their loved one's crimes). For me personally, I'm the same way with friends, and am incredibly forgiving of all kinds of faults, due to how much I care for them. It would honestly be very hard to "want" my friend or loved one to be locked up, despite what they did being horrendous and worthy of imprisonment. Just as it'd be hard to "want" a loved one or friend who committed an abortion to be imprisoned for it, in the case of it being criminalized.

That was me trying my best. I hope you can come to accept me as I am, but if you can't, I hope we can at least focus on the topic moreso than derailing the thread with personal quibbles.

I'm not one of the people who is pro-abortion, and especially not one who laughs or jokes about it, or who attempts to keep expanding the definition of it even into childhood while touting oneself as an empathetic person...so I'm not one of their kind. I wasn't saying Luke isn't a human being, which we all are.

It seems to me like the Way that Jesus taught, and then the apostles expounded upon, which references the Old Testament, presents a lot of ways for us to develop ourselves. It's primarily a matter of character development, which we don't find in other religious traditions. To some, it might seem like developing oneself on a level of character and virtue isn't so interesting. Where's the meditation? Where are the rituals? Why don't we get to the astral realm, and read the akashic records? Where are the prayer beads and the mantras? But developing oneself as a good person is the gateway to the occult mysteries. It is literally info on how to "develop oneself", and is "cultivation"...as opposed to sharing various meditation methods, which don't necessarily "develop oneself". Besides that, unofficially there are a couple of meditations one could do from the Bible. One of them is "be still and know that I am God". Another is the Our Father prayer that Jesus taught...and he also gave the instruction to practice it while alone, or locked in one's closet, as opposed to doing it publicly. Even simply reading the Bible, such as the Psalms, is a meditation method (called Lectio Divina). There was a forum member here, who once spoke of a method called "message qigong", where the vibration of various words has an effect on the subtle energies of the body as well as the mind. For instance, meditating on the word "peace" would have a different effect than meditating on the word "tranquility". Well, he didn't say this, but reading scripture is the same thing as that, and the words themselves change who we are...besides the conveyance of the meaning of those words, and when things don't make sense (such as two different sections seeming to contradict), the insight that is drawn out naturally as a result of the intellectual conflict and lack of resolution.

Abortion...is humorous to some people. Such as the comedian and the crowd laughing and clapping. This same thing which thelerner said is "a hard subject, painful". The tearing of limbs of the most innocent human being, which is then sold to companies for a profit...is a laughing matter to your kind.

Well, you don't have to be willing, and you can go sit on the fence. I'm certainly willing, and can put up with all kinds of nonsense about "men can't tell women what to do" etc, in order to defend the life that's at stake. Also - your position here definitely negates your statement that "the early the better" when it comes to abortions. I think you were just trying to sound like a good person when you said that, in order to appease other people who might judge you...but in fact, you don't believe "the earlier the better".

I can assure you, that's constantly happening; I've seen numerous liberals talking like that. Since it's the position their team chooses, they dissociate from the reality of what's happening with it, and go to ideological extremes. Although it's not about the late term abortions, here's an example of the "sadistic glee": Here's another example of sadistic glee: I am 100% certain that under the right social conditions, you would behave the same way, since it's apparent that it hasn't been your belief that a fetus is a human life.

The Huangdi neijing chapter 2 says: So getting up early, going for short walks, being relaxed and loose, thinking on life and living things, abstaining from killing or doing severe things, being generous rather than greedy, and being rewarding or even merciful rather than wrathful. Basically, getting in line with the principle of life itself. We should follow heaven and earth, which at this time (if we live in nature) cause all things around us to gradually come to life. So we should also behave that way, in order to live in line with the seasons. Furthermore, the Jin gui yao lue says: So, along with "do not kill" comes the idea not to ingest dead foods. Good time to eat lots of veggies, which are living foods, and perhaps avoid or cut down on meat. Maybe more raw foods if tolerable. Good time to make and eat some sprouts, which are similar to the phase of spring where things are just sprouting out of the ground or budding on the trees (as opposed to summer, when there's blossoming and fruiting, or autumn when things are past the point of maturity and will begin to wither). Sprouts are something that can help clean our digestive system of food that's been stagnant in there. Veggies in general are cleansing, too. ... In the Chinese solar calendar, we're just now past the midway point of spring (which was the equinox)...as opposed to the Western way of looking at things, which states that spring just started on the equinox. These old admonitions apply to that solar calendar. See this site and look at the "Chinese 24 Seasons Calendar", and note that it says that Chinese summer begins, or spring ends, on May 6th. Also, we should look at the entire year like this: at summer solstice is the greatest amount of yang or life. At winter solstice is the least, and yin is the strongest. Spring and autumn equinoxes are like life increasing while yin and yang are balanced, and life decreasing while yin and yang are balanced, respectively. So from a day or two ago when there was the spring equinox, up until the summer solstice, we're in the best time for the increasing of the life principle. We're also at a time right now when things are relatively balanced, so it's a great time to cultivate. Especially at April 6th, when the moon begins to grow again, which is something else that signifies the increasing of life (as opposed to when the moon is waning). Aside from years and months, on the daily solar cycle, the time of first light until high noon is like spring going into the height of summer. It's another great time to cultivate the principle of life, as opposed to doing our practices in the afternoon or evening. Life is movement, so to cultivate life we should do moving practices at those times. The sun is symbolic of yang, of life, so it's good to be in the sun and moving at these times. ... Oh, also, I think we have to consider the generation cycle of the five elements. The wood of spring depends on the nourishment of the water element. Spring is a great time to not be dehydrated...drink lots of pure spring water.

I appreciate the answer; it's okay to admit that we don't know. I appreciate that you said the part which I bolded above, and that you agree, the earlier the better for abortion (like the morning after pill). I'm going to challenge you to think about this further with me. A heartbeat is clearly a sign of a unique life. Extra heartbeats don't manifest randomly inside of people's bodies except in the case of being pregnant, and in pregnancy, that's a life which develops into a human being. Having a heartbeat clearly shows that it's a living being. The way to check if an adult is dead, when you see them lying still on the ground, is to check for a pulse...only in rare cases due to medical advances do people live without having a heartbeat...prior to those advances, when the heart stopped, life stopped. The heartbeat of an embryo can be detected at week 6. That can end up being when a woman is 2 weeks late for her period, depending on where she's at in her cycle at conception...very early. If we're truly believing that "the earlier the better" for "medical intervention" (aka, killing the unique life), then perhaps by looking at what life is scientifically, we could decide just how early it should be. Perhaps we could discover signs of life prior to the heartbeat, but having a heartbeat is an undeniable one. No one can speak of a being with a heartbeat and say that it's "not alive". So, that's where we should draw the line. Week 6. If science discovered signs of "life" prior to that (and I think they have), perhaps it should be even earlier...but this sign is so clear that it's undeniable. About having empathy for all...that's again not accurate, since you don't consider the fetus. You speak of the moment when the fetus physically separates as seeming like a "pretty clear demarcation point". That's way too late...prior to that, the fetus is able to think and feel, as well as survive independently of the mother. Why don't you have empathy for it, knowing that these things are true? Regarding "awareness of being separate from the mother" as being a potential sign of life, that's not accurate. When you go to sleep at night, you're not aware of yourself...that doesn't mean you're no longer alive, no longer a human, or no longer worthy of living. First of all, we have no idea what it's like for fetuses or newborns from the first person perspective...we've forgotten what it was like for us (well, most of us have). We can only speculate about such things...and speculation is not a solid ground to stand on when it comes to deciding whether someone else lives or dies. Furthermore, let's say they don't yet understand that they're a unique being...this is just because they haven't learned how the world works yet...it doesn't imply that they lack a will to live, lack feelings and emotions which they experience, lack the experience of pain and suffering, lack the reception of insight, etc. It just means they haven't formed a certain notion with their conceptual mind yet...aside from not having that notion, perhaps they're fully capable in terms of being a "being" and having "consciousness". Again, when you sleep, you lack this notion as well. Going back to the bolded words above, Luke...you claim that "the earlier the better" for abortion is your position. If that's the case, why haven't you been speaking out against late term abortions, abortions past the point of viability, and newborn killings? Why is it that every liberal here goes silent on those matters, and wants to talk about "women's healthcare" in general, if your position is truly that you think "the earlier the better"? Be honest.

Think of it like this: if a daughter or friend murdered a 12 year old, would you be okay with them being locked up for years? That's not such a hard question.

I sympathize with (the idea of) the woman in poverty who truly can't afford to raise a child, and would simply be bringing a life into this world only to starve it despite her best wishes otherwise. But perhaps there's a way for the child, once born, to be taken care of by others. Or a woman who truly can't live with the idea and reality of bringing a rapist's offspring into the world. Some things don't have solutions, or at least not easy ones. Is the solution to this dilemma you present that we permit the mass murder of the innocent? Is that truly a better result?

She isn't an enlightened sage, so I can't agree that it's best left up to the individual...especially when approximately half of individuals have been successfully brainwashed to think they have the choice to kill their babies, that it's okay, etc...when their "friends" inside of their ideological bubble actually encourage it. We do need the truly enlightened sages guiding our society. Society needs to listen. I wish you'd honestly address the issue...when does life begin? It's not a hard question. What is a sign of being alive, scientifically speaking? When do some mothers (the ones who want their babies) consider their baby to be a baby? If you have an opinion on the subject, which you do, it should come from a factual basis...do you know why you have the ideas that you do?

I mean, that might be on topic for the thread's title...but I think this thread isn't about certain people having access to abortion and others not having access. It's not an "extreme", although I understand it seems that way to people who assume abortion is the norm/moderate position. There are many countries where abortion is fully illegal because a fetus is considered a human life. Even in our country, we have legally considered the fetus to have personhood at viability (arbitrarily). Think about a mother who actually wants her child, and let's say she's at 9 weeks. Her and her husband have been trying for years to get pregnant, and now it has finally happened thanks to costly fertility treatments. Then someone who is jealous comes and beats her so as to end the pregnancy, and the embryo dies. Does this mother not consider it to be a premeditated murder of her baby, who she was already starting to care for? Is the law not there to serve individuals, like this mother who has been wronged? Why, in the US, should this case merely be considered "battery"? A human life that had its own heartbeat was snuffed out in this example. If it was criminal, there would be criminal consequences to committing the crime, just like any other crime. I don't think, if the law changed, that people would be convicted retroactively. I'm personally not in favor of the death penalty, since I think outside of a war or self defense scenario, it's no one's right to end another's life...and I think it harms the people whose job it is to perform the execution. My view of justice is that it's not merely a punishment, but also a protection for others in society...so let's say a serial killer, they should get life imprisonment in order to protect the public primarily, and not for the purpose of vengeance against them. Could be...although we all understand that miscarriages happen, and I think if things were this strict it'd be more than a little insane. I like your post, because I think things like this make a good point. As a healthcare practitioner, I do think the pill and intrauterine devices are often harmful to the woman (I've treated them in clinic where we find out the side effects). Messing with hormones so as to become infertile, I do think could be considered "poison". But this is not to say that I'm opposed to birth control. The birth control issue is really a Catholic thing only. If it were to be legally decided that an embryo at conception is a human life, then yes this would be something to address. The day after pill is even trickier since it's not "birth control" but is really a very early abortion. I tend to view pregnancy as a scale, where at conception a human life begins, and at birth the human life comes out...and along that scale it's more and more severe ethically for an abortion to take place. While it might be murder to take a day after pill, at least for me, that's much less worse than a late term abortion. In cases like being raped, where the woman didn't have the option to use birth control or even abstinence, I could personally be understanding up to a certain point...because the human life is so undeveloped that, let's say prior to 6 weeks, it doesn't even have a heartbeat yet. So something taken the day after is the least harmful option. Truly...it's a difficult issue. Why do you repeat that it's the woman's body? The fetus isn't her body. This is a basic and obvious scientific fact. For a husband whose wife got pregnant, when he wants a child, he also doesn't think of his future baby as "her body", and would be pretty distraught if she decided to kill their baby because she thought it was her body only. Regarding fully respecting certain people...I've had numerous friends who got abortions. They felt like they could confide that in me, at times when they had kept it a secret. I respect them, and am understanding that our culture is confused and brainwashed on this issue...and I didn't chastise them with even a single word for having done it (which I logically think is murder). Just something that might not be obvious in an internet discussion forum. The kind of choice I like is whether to adopt or not. One of my friends ended up doing that after her first abortion, which was very hard for her, and while she missed her baby she did have a much better time with that choice.

Maybe he meant bassoons?

Hey buddy, I engaged you intellectually without insulting you, and you didn't come back with anything intellectual in response, but just tried to call me a buffoon multiple times. Nice argument.

I know you were just presenting ideas to ponder, but this one in the bold sounds like an attempt at stating a fact. Did you take a survey of "the inhabitants of the planet"? No. Someone else could just as easily say that 75% of all people in the world believe that a being has been killed...how does anyone know these stats? It might seem likely that your statement is true, to you, if you live in a liberalized area, because you're used to a majority of people having that certain opinion...but there's a whole other world outside of that bubble. Also, "ownership had not transferred from the mother and her body to a birthed child that is separate and autonomous"...well, a child doesn't have to be birthed in order to be autonomous. That's why we speak of "viability" - the point at which the child could survive on its own outside of the womb, prior to birth. There's another aspect to this: who says that a mother "owns" the unborn? She's responsible for it, but it's a unique life (has its own heartbeat, will later develop into a full grown person), and she doesn't OWN it.

Thanks, I look forward to it or a future seminar if I'm not able to make this one.

Making a choice isn't the part that made the story beautiful, Luke. Not in the least. "Forced to give birth" is a very weird way to put it...when the alternative to giving birth (which takes about 9 months and is inconvenient for the individual only) is murdering another human being (which lasts forever, and is infringing on someone's else's right to life). I'm often "forced to" be around certain people that I dislike...that doesn't give me the right to murder them in order to not feel "forced". That's not my "choice" to make. Parents are "forced to" support their children until 18, or even further...again, they can't murder their kids as a convenient alternative. No one thinks of this as the government "forcing them" to raise their own kids. Basically, your way of looking at it assumes that abortion was an option in the first place. It's not, ethically speaking. There is getting pregnant and giving birth, and then there is not getting pregnant. Just like, I can choose to go to the store, or not...and choosing to go to the store doesn't include murdering people there who annoy me so that I have a better shopping experience. That's something I could do, but ethically, it's not up for grabs: to do such a thing is absolutely unethical. Of course, people can choose to abort...the current US law unfortunately allows it, and even if it didn't, people could still choose it...just like they can choose to murder someone, or anything else with severe consequences. On the aspect of someone being raped and then having to go through 9 months of being reminded of that, among other things...abortion is still far more horrible than that, for quite a few reasons. I also think much less harm is done in the case of a morning after pill than abortion, even if human life begins at conception...and perhaps such a thing could be reserved only for those circumstances? I don't know the solution to every tricky situation. Here's something I do know...liberals keep trying to gain more ground in murdering children, by insisting on late term abortions, beyond viability, and even killing newborns. If someone was raped and got pregnant, there is a lot of time prior to all of this bullshit, where they could've had an abortion...why late term? Why try to get mothers choosing to kill their newborns like the Virginia governor? It's unnecessary in this absolute worst case rape-scenario, and is simply disgusting. But the aborted one is a human being, and a person. Its life is taken for someone else's convenience, at a time when it doesn't have a voice to speak up for itself. Why do you not respect that person? I think it all boils down to some like yourself refusing to admit that the unborn are actually human beings in development. I challenge you, Luke, to truly think about when a human life becomes a person, and if you're truly able to tell how that happens based on your definition, or if you're just guessing. Also, question if your view is established on scientific grounds, or if it attempts to ignore that. We don't have the "freedom" to take another person's life (even if the US law right now says that we do). That's not freedom at all...that's the opposite of freedom for that person, who lost their freedom to live. And murder isn't a "freedom", it's a crime (although current US law turns a blind eye to abortion being murder). The same thing could happen to you, as happened to them, where for some reason it's thought that you don't really qualify as human or worthy of life (in fact, it does in other countries). Also, there are countries in which abortion is currently illegal...and therefore people don't have the "freedom" to kill innocent humans in those places. The ones who want to don't think of abortion as a "freedom", as you're privileged to do, but instead think of it as something criminal...which it actually is. Also, "freedom to make their own decisions about their own lives"...abortion is making a decision about someone else's life much more than it is about making a decision for one's own life. If it was about one's own life, then no one would care; at least I wouldn't. I often hear the nonsense, "men shouldn't tell women what to do with their vaginas, only women can" (despite the fact that MANY women are pro-life)...but this issue has nothing to do with a vagina. I don't care what women do with their uteri. The point is that there's a separate human life involved, so it's not whatsoever a "decision about their own lives".

No one has the right to take another person's life. This issue isn't about women, but is about soon to be babies. Your terminology is intentionally manipulative and misleading. Why DON'T liberals change the conversation to this, instead of continually fighting for the ability to abort? Let's also throw in making it easier for couples to adopt children. I'm certainly not.

Respect to whatever you decide to do, in regard to participating in this thread or not... There's something to be said about planting seeds in people's minds (through discussion, as challenging as it might be to "discuss" in the midst of two sides digging in their heels, with no apparent open mindedness)...and if others eventually end up seeing that those seeds are true through their own reasoning and experience, they'll end up nourishing those seeds on their own (having their own ideas and beliefs about things) and their lives will end up changing entirely as a result. They can go from apathetic about the murder of innocent beings, to someone who strives to protect every life. But this process must be natural, and it normally takes years for a seed (an idea we've heard about somewhere) to develop into anything...so contrary to this discussion being pointless, it can be fruitful if you look at from the perspective of years or decades rather than whether we can instantly convince someone else of anything. Or we can remain silent as approximately half of our population thinks murdering innocent humans is a choice they can make in life. But I tend to think that's more of a pointless exercise (the milquetoast silencing of the truth), compared to sharing ideas which might eventually help people find a better way of thinking and being. One life changed can potentially create a domino effect in the world, or that person may end up being incredibly influential for many others. Thinking that we're individually incapable of making a positive dent in the world just prevents us from ever doing so.

You already did, and I'm calling you out on that. There's nothing more horrific which would make someone choose abortion as a "least horrific" option.

Could you be specific about what would be more horrific, which would make one choose this horror?

Wow, you got some extra kidney qi! Must be practicing well lately.