new moderator

topic posted Wed, March 5, 2008 - 9:23 AM by  offlineLeslie
I'd like to volunteer to be the new moderator. When non-raw vegans come in and spam their philosophies against the wishes of the person posting the thread, they need to be set straight on the error of their ways. If not me, then someone who is a total raw vegan.
posted by:
Leslie
Albuquerque
  • Re: new moderator

    Wed, March 5, 2008 - 10:54 AM
    hey guys,

    i put in my nomination for ::Leslie:: for moderator!!

    i am fairly new to this tribe and to raw im glad to be here!!!
  • Re: new moderator

    Wed, March 5, 2008 - 12:40 PM
    Im not a strict raw vegan, but for much of the year Im pretty close to it when the right food options are available. Im not fanatical about avoiding all cooked food, but I appreciate learning and sharing about raw vegan foods in general, because I agree that in most instances raw foods are healthier. Im studying to be naturopathic physician.

    Is your platform based on strict censorship of people who disagree even in a respectful manor with no name calling? If so, I hope that at least one other person is nominated so that people can be vote between a few options.

    I would nominate Ezekiel, if he wants it.
    • Re: new moderator

      Wed, March 5, 2008 - 2:01 PM
      No, I'm not for strict censorship, and I appreciate that you are respectful. I have been through some fierce go-rounds with people who seem opposed to the principles of raw vegan foods except where it suited their lifestyle. Since most people on the planet eat Some raw vegan..... there have to be boundaries that define raw veganism as more than just the foods that qualify.... it's a Total Philosophy. We have to orient ourselves towards increasing our consumption, rather than making excuses for not eating raw.... because might be (hypothetically) are over 6 billion people justifying why they eat only Some raw vegan foods .... so isn't that (just some) enough(?) It's just not a good way to learn if I don't at least segregate the discussions around total raw veganism and transitional raw veganism (or those who are merely raw curious). So I would not censor people for discussing their belief that total raw veganism is not for them.... If they aren't doing this in a thread devoted to why and how we Should be eating totally raw... (and consistently-actively discouraging eating this way).
      This approach has been my experience of how very controversial subjects are managed........ and I've been kicked out of one tribe just for not "being with the program" (respectful though I was).... but I don't expect to be That intolerant.... just using my 17+ years experience with raw veganism to not let experts in fields not directly related to raw veganism to repeatedly dominate a topic from a viewpoint outside of the principles of raw veganism, without at least dynamically addressing the issues at hand as presented from the perspectives of dedicated raw vegans.
      • Re: new moderator

        Wed, March 5, 2008 - 2:22 PM
        If that is the case, then I would support you, even though Im not super active here and am more "raw conscious + 100% vegan", than pure raw foodist. I am an herbalist, and some life saving medicines simply wont release their active chemicals without heat or work in a raw state.

        Im just a little concerned that you might censor the raw-conscious (As opposed to the trolls who absolutely deserve to get the boot). You should be open to having some of your ideas challenged so long as there isnt personal attacks. For example, if I posted a study I just read on the pros and cons of a raw vegan diet, demonstrating the amazingly positive effects that raw food diets have on reducing LDL cholesterol, but also points to a trend towards higher homocystine levels and lower HDL cholesterol (The important kind you need to make hormones), I would hope that you would take an unbiased look at such a peer reviewed study.

        Also, what if somebody is currently 100% raw foods, but they dont agree that every single person "should" be raw or that its the right diet for everybody? To be part of this tribe do you not only have to be a raw food vegan, but believe that its the only right way to eat? That just seems like a fanatical position to me.

        Being a nutritionist and having a bio-medical background my interest is to look at various diets, observe their effects, and prescribe based on what is right for different people. I might not recomend the raw foods vegan diet for somebody who already has low HLD cholesterol until that is dealt with first, but I might for somebody who has too much of both types. Since I am overall supportive of raw foods diets, I dont feel that sharing such a perspective is against the tribes description.
        • Re: new moderator

          Wed, March 5, 2008 - 4:34 PM
          The main thing is that you have to consider, and not bypass, the basic issues of why many of the medical studies fail to encompass certain issues relevant to raw veganism, because raw , and transitioning onto raw, creates an entirely new health paradigm about which there is practically no data in all the medical research. A willingness to explore these specific issues, rather than a jumping into acceptance of the foregone conclusions based upon "Norms" that are not normal at all to people who have gone totally raw vegan..... that is what is needed if anything is to be learned from those who present "scientific" data. There is an entirely different understanding of how drugs, herbal and otherwise, act on the body that is essential to understanding how raw diet "goes beyond" the "need" to use cooked botanical extracts. There is a consciousness that much of what drugs do is to Repress symptomologies.... effecting the superficial relief of symptoms, yet not really Healing the organism in the fullest sense.
          Raw vegan diet isn't the "only" way to eat, but there is much experience to show and demonstrate, and many who are Living Proof that it is By Far the Optimum Path to sustainable and progressive health.
          Things like cholesterol issues fall in the realm of transitional problems. These generally cease to even be matters of any issue for those who adhere to a total raw vegan diet over time. The human body does have the wisdom to balance and heal itself if we give it the correct (living) sustenances.
          There may be those who will stubbornly refuse to do more than partial raw diet, and many whose health is so far gone that they're not up to the challenge of going totally raw. My main concern is in keeping those issues from "coloring" the Main Thrust of the understanding that for Most of us.... total raw vegan diet Works, and continual digressions into all the ways supposedly "it doesn't work" can become extremely counterproductive and outright Negative.
          We are here to learn that in 99.99% of cases it Does work... and that exceptions are due mostly to lack of understanding of how to 'make it work', or 'having waited until at death's door'.
          Suspend your disbelief until you have investigated thoroughly.... and confine your "beliefs in an attitude of disbelief" to threads that state as much that they are to discuss your disbelief, or expect to be vigorously challenged by this person, if I am to keep this tribe on course as a moderator.
          That is my anticipated strategy, if I take on the responsibility of moderator.
          • Re: new moderator

            Wed, March 5, 2008 - 5:10 PM
            Its true that we dont "have" to use herbs that require heating to release their active constituents. We could choose not to use those plants. That just seems a little too ultra fanatical to me, going way beyond just being health conscious and consuming more raw whole foods, which is what raw foods is about for me. I like raw foods, and I also like the study of alchemy and herbal medicine. From my philosophical position, it is not always wrong to extract part from the whole or to transform one substance to another.

            Do you also have a prejudice against those who practice aromatherapy? Without distillation (using heat, glassware, and tubes) we cannot concentrate essential oils for practice. We could use the suns heat, but the effects are not significantly different. In theory we could just smell the plants themselves, but that would be a royal pain the ass trying to carry around 100 lbs of fresh plants in air tight sealed containers to keep their essence from mixing. These concentrates are useful in healing. By practicing distillation are we distorting the natural world that God gave, somehow committing a sin? Such an extreme position almost reminds me of church doctrine against folk healers during the dark ages.

            The Sun, our source of life is burning. All energy for life to exist comes from the energy given off from the burning of the sun. Ever sugar in the fruits you eat comes from light converted by plant life into matter. Forest fires are also a natural process. When we break these organic components down into their most basic elements, they do not become poison, but the food for new plant life to spring forth.

            By now we have gotten totally off topic again, but at least your interesting to talk to.

            Help me to understand the moral position against the use of heat to transform and extract materials for food, medicine, or whatever.

            If you had Malaria, would you refuse an extract of quinine from tree bark because heat was used in its extraction? I wonder if the majority of raw foodists take their practice to such an extreme.
            • Re: new moderator

              Wed, March 5, 2008 - 6:02 PM
              I would respond by asking you to speak to the addiction syndrome of endorphine patterning due to chronic leucocytosis that is resultant directly from ingesting cooked foods. That is constantly being dodged by those who would portray my position , and the position of other total raw fooders as "fanatical".
              My primary opposition is to cooking foods. I'm not so rigid regarding things like aromatherapy, because the toxicities become negligible in comparison to the benefits. The realm of herbal extracts strays to both sides of this line, so I point out the dangers and allow there there can be benefits.... but maintain that the body has the wisdom to heal itself, and that herbs are not the actual agent of healing. Herbs can (to some degree) facilitate healing, yet can also perpetuate weaknesses when used "in lieu of" actually eating from life energetics, and typically falling back into the syndromes of cooked foods, with all the chronic loading of low-level toxicities. The bottom line is, there are better alternatives than manipulation of pathologies by way of druglike compounds..... and raw vegan diet can provide such opportunities to self-heal if we take the time to present an open mind towards an understanding of the natural dynamics of cellular health.
              All manner of infections, even malarial, could well be overcome by the body's own defenses for a person fully enlivened by living foods diet. The fact that nearly all of us have lived most or all of our lives "in the thrall" of cooked foods, with all it's degenerative effects, may well mean we have to still depend upon some intervention in terms of herbal medicine and some conventional medicine....... yet we must continually aspire away from the typical resignation that we are Dependent upon the old school approaches to 'prevention of disease'.... which are apparently failing to prevent more diseases (statistics) than even that which is simply being repressed into an illusion of a "cure".
              Light, and coherent energies are what we receive from the sun. Fire at a healthy distance is great. Fire Directly Onto the Life energetics of Living food..... is as deadly as when put directly onto our physical bodies. When you eat fired foods, you eat chemical ashes that can keep you living, even effecting stimulation and growth, much as steroids and artificial fertilizers can have some narrow and short-lived benefits, but at a dramatically reduced state of overall potential health.
              • Re: new moderator

                Wed, March 5, 2008 - 9:47 PM
                Well, your not totally unreasonable then.

                "maintain that the body has the wisdom to heal itself, and that herbs are not the actual agent of healing."

                Sometimes the body is incapable of successfully fighting an infection on its own, and sometimes the external medicine makes the difference between life and death. Some pranic healers might have amazing mind body healing skills, but there is no doubt that there are people who lived because of chemicals extracted from plants who who would have died if left to their own bodies healing ability in its weakened state. With fire I can make a much wider variety of medicines, though I can sometimes make cold extracts or use fermentation and allow the alcohols to extract instead of heat.

                "All manner of infections, even malarial, could well be overcome by the body's own defenses for a person fully enlivened by living foods diet."

                Raw foods diets can be very healthy and very invigorating. I can feel the difference when I eat nothing but sprouted grains and nuts vs eating cooked foods. My awareness is enhanced by the living foods even after only a few days of raw dieting....However, you are exaggerating. You are making unrealistic claims.

                People who eat raw foods still die from malaria, still get staph infections that potentially turn deadly, and still end up with chronic health problems. Sometimes raw foods is not the cure for every ailment. Sometimes you need some medicine, and sometimes that medicine makes the difference between life and death even in a spiritually aware health conscious individual on a raw foods diet.

                "When you eat fired foods, you eat chemical ashes that can keep you living, even effecting stimulation and growth, much as steroids and artificial fertilizers can have some narrow and short-lived benefits, but at a dramatically reduced state of overall potential health."

                I dont eat burnt food ever. Foods fried to the point of being crispy are certainly toxic. I agree with you. In fact, I would go so far as to say there is no conceivable health benefits to deep frying ever. Deep fried food will lead to an early death. The effects of boiling is a bit different, as no ash is produced, but it does produce starch which can as you pointed out become an endorphine addiction. These chemicals can in fact negatively affect your glycemic index and impact your consciousness like a mild opiate.

                Sometimes I will eat breads that are made from whole sprouted grains and cooked at low heat rather than high temperature, and I dont get the same "food grog" or endorphine fatigue that you are speaking of when I eat these foods in moderation along with fruit and sprouts.


                • Re: new moderator

                  Wed, March 5, 2008 - 11:22 PM
                  The claims I make regarding the fairly miraculous potential of a total raw foods diet are dependent upon such factors as the degree of totality, the quality of life of the raw foods available, the dietary history of the individual, and such. It is an Ideal, only because So Very Much is Compromised in our current situation. You are working from a pragmatic view..... which may serve the purposes of those invested in the current states of affairs. As for me, I am a Raw Visionary, upholding the high standards that need to be worked towards if we are to be a transformative force for positive revival of humanity out of its current dramatic decline into all manner of afflictions of mind, body, and spirit. It's important to respect and strive for the tangible and realistic ideals that I uphold.... as they are well within our capabilities to achieve, and cannot be reached by an inclination towards reflexive or habitual compromise. In many other more mundane matters of life I may choose to shrug off idealism, and seek compromise at every turn. Not so in the realm of our basic life nourishment.... which is Already Grossly in a State of Compromise, .....as we have inherited it in this condition.
                  • This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.

                    Re: new moderator

                    Thu, March 6, 2008 - 5:36 PM
                    "The claims I make regarding the fairly miraculous potential of a total raw foods diet are dependent upon such factors as the degree of totality, the quality of life of the raw foods available, the dietary history of the individual, and such."


                    No. Even if you eat the best diet on earth, you might still die of an infectious disease or have a genetic condition that requires treatment of one kind of another besides diet. Diet should play a role in any healing regime, but infectious organisms have a will of their own and can be resilient even against a healthy immune system. This almost reminds me of the story of the Christian Science couple that let their children die because they didnt believe in any form of medicine, even herbal or natural, besides prayer. Their child died because they would not consent to treatment. Advocating a healthy diet to prevent disease makes total sense, but refusing medicine on the basis that raw foods will cure everything in everyone no matter what is pure ignorance.


                    I only pop my head in here from time to time, but when it comes to democratic process its best to keep things open for long enough to allow the greatest participation. I would give it another 3 days minimum, and if nobody else wants to do it then he wins by default.
                    • Re: new moderator

                      Thu, March 6, 2008 - 6:21 PM
                      Arguing raw science vs. conventional science is not our primary purpose here. We all are familiar with the "official line" that the medical establishment offers. It's not appropriate for those who have limited experience with total raw diet to bring up these fear-based paradigms when we all already understand That belief system..... and are learning a more wholistic way of thinking and being. The fact that the mind and spirit have been Proven By the Medical Establishment to play a very important role in healing (though this is, even so, seldom allowed as a valid factor) is not to be forgotten if we are to again digress into the thinking of the (failing in many ways) health sciences system.

                      In any case, I would advise against putting suppositions "into my mouth", as it were. I've already hinted that I am not totally opposed to conventional medicine.... at least as an option when best efforts fail... so I ask that if one is confrontational, that one at least be accurate in their portrayal of another's statements.
    • Re: new moderator

      Thu, March 6, 2008 - 10:46 PM
      Thanks for the nomination! I'm not up to that responsibility, because I'm not always consistently active on tribe. . . but I would nominate you in return!

      According to this tribe's homepage, it is a " place for the sharing of information pertaining to the raw & living foods lifestyle." This is a lifestyle that takes a lot of vigilance, experimentation, trial and error, as well as exploration of personal attitudes around food and how they help and hinder our experience of life. I think to make the assumption that commitment to 100% raw vegan diet is the healthiest, most life-enhancing thing for everyone exploring raw foods is naive at best.
      If this is to be a tribe primarily for people committed to 100% raw vegan diet/lifestyle, then change the blurb on the tribe's homepage to reflect that. If not, then open discussion including experiences and beliefs other than a "100% is best" view should be welcomed. I think everyone on this tribe is at some point in their own experimentation, and we all want to figure out what works best for us, be it a natural hygiene approach, a gabriel cousens approach, a juicing/blending/fasting, raw/macro, ayurvedic, whatever.
      anyway, we'll figure it out!
      love ezekiel
      • Re: new moderator

        Fri, March 7, 2008 - 1:45 PM
        If you aren't aspiring towards 100% raw vegan (at least intending that) you are "at best" semi-raw vegan...... which would be OK if there were not a Huge difference in the results between what happens on a 99% (or less) raw diet vs. the Significant (by orders of magnitude) Differences/results with total raw diet.
        If it comes down to making that definition, then let's do so. If I am made moderator, I will put that in the definition, as, technically, less than total raw vegan 'as a fixed philosophy' is just vegan.....with 'some' raw....................................period. The intent is not to exclude those who aren't 100% raw, but to keep the discourse focused Specifically on working towards & Sustaining 100% raw vegan.... rather than "settling" for just Vegan ...with some raw included.
        • Re: new moderator

          Fri, March 7, 2008 - 2:10 PM
          Leslie,
          If you were moderator, would you discredit anything i have to say in this tribe because i am not 100% vegan?
          I am 100% raw _most_ of the time, and about 95% vegan. I get a lot out of your contributions to the raw food tribes and would like to continue being a part of these discussions. However, it can be a challenge to work around your hard edge while still feeling like i'm part of the community.

          Ezekiel, i really REALLY appreciate your attitude and approach.
          m7
          • Re: new moderator

            Fri, March 7, 2008 - 2:54 PM
            I agree with Ezekiel, and that is why I am concerned about Leslie being moderator. I am 100% vegan, but not 100% raw. However, I would love to learn more about raw foods without being discriminated against.

            Last summer, I spent nearly 3 months on a 100% raw diet that was not only "uncooked" but also "living". I lived mostly on bean, grain, and nut sprouts. I didnt even eat dry "raw" food if it wasnt living, and I felt amazing. The most noticeable effect was on my energy levels and the sharpening of my senses.

            As the season shifted into falls rainy season, I no longer felt the diet was appropriate for me (My meals didnt raise my body temperature the way a lentil curry would) and began to include some cooked beans, very lightly steamed vegetables, but continued eating lots of raw foods during the daylight hours.

            I feel that I am in the right place to discuss raw foods, and learn from others. Im sure that I could learn from Leslie as he probably has more experience specifically with raw diets than I do, but I am concerned about him discriminating against what is probably half of this tribe who is probably not 100% raw 100% of the time.
          • Re: new moderator

            Fri, March 7, 2008 - 2:55 PM
            ditto most of what madame7 said ~

            I'm more like 70% raw & all vegan. I am aware of the vast health impact differences in being 100% raw vegan, but if this tribe wants to be exclusive to the 100% people, then I guess I'd unsubscribe. I've gotta admit I'd be bummed if y'all choose to go that way b/c I learn a lot from y'all, but even given all I've learned, I do not personally feel the need to go 100% raw. I too feel a bit discriminated against by Leslie for my choice not go all raw & I've been a member here for a while & have never felt discriminated against before.

            Honestly, from reading Leslie's posts on this thread & the menses one, I'm not strongly opposed to Leslie, but I am disinclined to vote for him for moderator b/c I get the impression he is not able to sufficiently transcend his ego & resist the temptation to get preachy & confrontational. I think a more tollerant & inclusive attitude like Ezekiel's would be ideal for a moderator (but I respect Ezekiel's reasons for not being willing to take on the moderator job).

            Anyone else willing & able?
            • Re: new moderator

              Fri, March 7, 2008 - 3:43 PM
              Based on recent posts I would nominate Sentience, but I should have very limited say because I've only been a member a few weeks... I'm like 20% raw 100% vegan, I'm just here to learn about the benefits and decide how much raw I want to implement in my diet. IMO, Leslie's posts are a little intimidating for the more casual raw foodist.
              • Re: new moderator

                Fri, March 7, 2008 - 3:57 PM
                Thanks for the nomination, but I would prefer somebody who is a little stricter in their raw diet than I am, but who is more open and tolerant than Leslie. I do respect Leslie in that he has experience in the subject, but dont agree with how he might moderate the tribe.

                If nobody else more suitable steps up, I suppose I could do it, but I would encourage another nomination from the regulars, or else maybe I would pass the torch if another member wanted to become more active.
                • Re: new moderator

                  Thu, April 10, 2008 - 2:10 PM
                  I've seen Leslie post in the QP tribe, and he comes across as quite the fanatic. Due to this, I vote for Sentience
                  • This is the maximum depth. Additional responses will not be threaded.

                    Re: new moderator

                    Thu, April 10, 2008 - 6:27 PM
                    I am crushed by this scathing articulation of such demonstrative substantiveness, ......and it's keen perceptual acuity.......
                    • Re: new moderator

                      Thu, April 10, 2008 - 6:36 PM
                      I would really prefer that you picked somebody besides me who has been a member for longer. If you did pick me I would hand it over if somebody else wanted the position with the rest of the tribes blessing.

                      However, I dont think Leslie would be a good choice for reasons several people have brought up. I do hope that Leslie stays with the tribe though, as he has a lot of knowledge and experience with the subject, if little patience for disagreement.
                    • Re: new moderator

                      Thu, April 10, 2008 - 7:18 PM
                      *Raises leg, and dispenses nature's raw lemonade onto Leslie's shoe*
                      • Re: new moderator

                        Fri, April 11, 2008 - 10:19 AM
                        heehee.. i still vote for leslie..i like his fascistic enthusiasm!!
                        • Re: new moderator

                          Fri, April 11, 2008 - 11:03 AM
                          Merely observational fascism my dear, ...yet is it not better to lend a voice to the principles of nature and life....... by declaring that those who eat from death will suffer malaise and die?!! (as a natural consequence) .... and those who eat from living energetics will conquer disease with the weighty blow from the likes of a durian felled o'erhead by the winds of change......
                          .... have we not seen woe betide the lingerers in the limbos at the gates of hellish food fires? Wherein doth it behoove a tolerance for vacillation in these days of epoch fenceforth dispositional derriere positionings? These cyberlips may greet such as thine as invoked by thy countenance and rawesque demeanor........
                          • Re: new moderator

                            Fri, April 11, 2008 - 12:18 PM
                            I am very enthusiastic about raw living foods diets. However, you make the most absurd claims I have ever heard on the subject. We will ALL suffer malaise and die, and raw foodists will not be exempt. Raw foodists do suffer health problems, just like everybody else. If you are able to achieve a well balanced raw foods vegan diet, I can see a likely improvement in different areas of health, depending on what your diet was like before, but your level of fanaticism is enough to scare people away who are just getting their feet wet.

                            Animal suffering in my opinion is a moral issue. How you prepare your food is a health issue. Taking care of your health might be somewhat of a moral issue, but not on the level of this fire and brimstone crap you are spewing.


                            Look, if somebody comes to this tribe with a mostly raw diet, but says like they like peppermint tea with their sprouts, you dont have to declare them your enemy and chase them away. Diet affects the health of the body, but so does your state of mind. If you are constantly stressing people out, you cannot legitimately claim to be a healer.
                            • Re: new moderator

                              Fri, April 11, 2008 - 12:58 PM
                              wooooo....... things looks UUUUglee on yer side of the fence there... doesn't mean I'm going along with that on mine.......... if yer mind's all made up and done, there's no use fiddlin' with that noggin', eh? Who ever's been spewin' at ye best take heed, righto?
                              If one wants to polarize on "total raw" vs. "never intend to go that far"....... it's fertile grounds for a lot of ignorant talk from those who never stuck with total raw, or even tried it. Cooking destroys life energetics and degrades chemistry to boot. Most folks know (apparently) nothing about whether total raw fooders may overcome disease (that this is what generally happens with total raw fooders has been demonstrated with great frequency) ....(and in rare cases might eventually ascend their physical bodies into light bodies), .....and making declarations of certain disease and death based upon popular ignorance of such matters is not wise.
                              I honestly don't need to be moderator of this tribe, but am willing to do it if it's not going to stress some of us out. If your stress level is so easily triggered... it certainly isn't because you're not eating enough steamed rice and stir fries....
                              Working that Joyce Chen spiral slicer has made me cranky ................... www.youtube.com/watch
                              • Re: new moderator

                                Fri, April 11, 2008 - 1:07 PM
                                "wooooo....... things looks UUUUglee on yer side of the fence there... doesn't mean I'm going along with that on mine.......... if yer mind's all made up and done, there's no use fiddlin' with that noggin', eh?"


                                This statement,coming from Leslie, is what some would refer to as irony


                                "Cooking destroys life energetics"

                                what is "Life Energetics", can you please define the term?


                                "and in rare cases might eventually ascend their physical bodies into light bodies"


                                Ha, an internet woo woo
                                • Re: new moderator

                                  Fri, April 11, 2008 - 1:11 PM
                                  Id like to see Leslie turn into a ball of light. If he demonstrates his ability to do this, I will gladly support him as moderator.
                                  • Re: new moderator

                                    Fri, April 11, 2008 - 1:34 PM
                                    >>>Id like to see Leslie turn into a ball of light. If he demonstrates his ability to do this, I will gladly support him as moderator.<<<

                                    Seconded.

                                    On a serious note, we do need to pick some sort of moderator soon, as we've been without one for a month or so... granted everyone here seems reasonably well-behaved, but still...

                                    Sent I think you're the only person with any votes besides Leslie, so unless you can suggest someone else, I will message the tribe gods and suggest you.
                                    • Re: new moderator

                                      Fri, April 11, 2008 - 1:37 PM
                                      Id do it if it will help keep the peace for a while. Ill promise to be on my best behavior, and I will hand the position over to another regular on request if the rest of the tribe gives me the thumbs up.

                                      I hope Leslie stays, but I think he is trying to push more than a dietary lifestyle. Its like this is his religion and hes forcing it down peoples throats. I would take the position until somebody else wanted it if that is what the people want.
                                • Re: new moderator

                                  Fri, April 11, 2008 - 3:13 PM
                                  Just an occasional woo. If you don't know what life energetics are, that frames the nature of the problem. There's enzymes, as living chemistry that's destroyed by heat. There are vast spectrums of life energetics involved in any living human, as well as in living foods. You cook it, you turn it into dead and foreign chemistry to the biocrystalline cellular matrix.
                                  If my mind is open and possesses experiences from both sides of the fence, there's no irony in asserting what I've learned by more than second hand opinions.
                                  If I were to be characterized as religious.... it is the religion of Life that I uphold....... whereas some here are Champions of the religion of Death, by all appearances.