Guest guest Posted January 12, 2005 Report Share Posted January 12, 2005 *Sigh* Saying there are other options than milk is a lot different than saying there are no benefits from it. When you said "cows milk is totally wrong for us anyway" I don't feel that is always the case. The Krishna's have enjoyed milk for a long long time. They are not being poisoned from it...they thrive! Of course there are other benefits than milk...duh! I know that. But that is not what we were talking about. I don't feel you are a liar...but I do feel you are quick to judge. Kristina In a message dated 1/12/05 5:33:22 A.M. Pacific Standard Time, writes: Message: 17 Wed, 12 Jan 2005 07:48:44 -0000 "heartwerk" <heartworkRe: Digest Number 1539There is nothing in milk that we cannot get in a more healthy way from plant foods. What do you mean 'doesn't seem honest'? Sounds like you are calling me a liar!Jo , lv2breathe@a... wrote:> > I am open to the idea. And since I believe in the Hari Krishnas and other > spiritual movements in general...I believe they may know a lot of things we do > not.> > No, we may not need milk and I am not a big advocate of it and I am willing > to go without...but to say there are not ANY nutritional benefits...I don't > know..doesn't seem honest.> > K> > In a message dated 1/11/05 2:13:38 P.M. Pacific Standard Time, > writes:> > Message: 20 > Tue, 11 Jan 2005 20:25:47 -0000> "Jo Cwazy" <heartwork@c...>> Re: Re:Ghandi's vegetarianism> > I really can't believe that would be the case - and we really don't need > milk past the breastfeeding stage. Cow's milk is totally wrong for us anyway.> > Jo> - > lv2breathe@a... > > Cc: Lv2breathe@a... > Tuesday, January 11, 2005 7:17 PM> Re:Ghandi's vegetarianism> > > No, of course not. It is a sad sight to see us taking away the milk that > belongs to a calf.> > I don't have much personal experience from cows at all. The Hari Krishna's > do...and according to the book...the cows did not have to be impregnated to > give the milk because it was given with "love". The cow was treated kindly > and wanted to give.> > That is not to say when I go to a Hari Krishna restaurant I assume all the > dairy products are pure in this...I do not. I would not be surprised if the > cows that supplied it were not happy cows. I am just saying that there may > have been a time and place where this was true. It maybe very well true that a > cow will produce milk for us if treated kindly and with love. > > > Kristina Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted January 12, 2005 Report Share Posted January 12, 2005 Kristina Cow's milk ~must~ be entirely wrong for us because we are not baby cows! Baby cows need cows milk - baby humans need human milk. Grown up cows do not need milk. Grown up humans do not need milk. Krishna's might thrive even more without milk, especially in this country where plant protein is abundant. I am well aware of the power of thought. I also know that animals are no different which is why I don't believe it is good to take milk from a cow, no matter how happy they feel. You do not know that I did not 'ponder it for a moment' or that 'I have no sense of wonder'. I actually do have a sense of wonder. When I hear something I wonder who has given the original information, and what they were trying to achieve by giving that information. I do not believe that the myths of Hare Krishna, the Bible, or any other religious stories are literal. They are meant to convey something to us - something the originator wants us to believe. This may be to make us see that some things could be considered right or wrong, or it could be to make us think something is okay when it is probably not. I would suggest it is possible that the person who originally wrote this was mainly a compassionate person, aware of the fact that we should treat people and animals well and not take advantage of them, but who thought, against his/her better instincts, that taking milk from animals was acceptable. It may even be that there was not enough plant protein in that place at that time for people to survive, in which case it could be considered necessary for people to take milk from other animals (better than killing the animal). Treating the cows kindly would also fit into the compassionate aspect of Krishna. He/She possibly felt guilty about this, and told the story of the cow giving milk happily if well cared for, so that it made ~his/her~ point that it is okay to do this. So while it may have been necessary to consume small amounts of milk it doesn't necessarily mean that the story about happy cows is literal. Jo ~Saying there are other options than milk is a lot different than saying there are no benefits from it. When you said "cows milk is totally wrong for us anyway" I don't feel that is always the case. The Krishna's have enjoyed milk for a long long time. They are not being poisoned from it...they thrive! ~You know...there is a lot we do not know. I don't know if you have heard about the experiment where people's thoughts were measured in water molecules. Each thought brought about a different crystalline structure. Anger was very jagged...love was like a snowflake. Thoughts make a difference and animals are no different. I'll post the book if you like. Actually I feel you are preachy. I make one post...and you make assumptions without finding out the facts. You jump all over anything that doesn't ring true with you without even pondering it for a moment. I don't think it's worth it having a dialogue with you...you are so damn dogmatic! YOU are the one who thinks she knows the only way to live...not me! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.