Controversy Over Blood Sacrifice

[Quetzal]

Re: Controversy over Blood Sacrifice

So because you felt guilty others should too?

COULD I afford a healthy vegetarian diet? No, actually I couldn't. Not with the vet bills my various animals have left me to pay off. Right now most of my meat consumption is the dark meat from roast chickens my neighbour buys since she only eats white meat. But that is utterly besides the point. I have no guilt about eating meat. I grew up on a vegetable farm and meat was the result of what my dad, uncle and grandad could shoot. Or it came from other local farmers and we picked the animal that was to be slaughtered for our meals.

Yes I DO like the taste of meat. I also like how it makes my body feel. And I'm not going to be made to feel guilty about that.

Please don't put words in my mouth. I talked about guilt as a personal experience, not as an attempt to suggest that you should feel the same.
If you wanna eat meat, do it. Just accept it for what it is. Taking life. You don't have to feel guilty about it, just don't try to pretend it's something it's not.

And don't be so quick to jump down people's throats.

I am one of the people who sees plant lives as just as valid as animal lives. Along with bacteria, yeast and other micro-organisms.

Therefore it doesn't make sense to me personally to elevate the life of one living thing over than of another based on species. To me, the elevation of one life over another is related to how much it means to me personally, and how much danger it presents to me or my loved ones. Species doesn't have much to do with it.

Fair enough. I disagree, but I liked your first post because you at least seem to accept killing for what it is, even if you aren't morally opposed to it. It's all the dancing around words people do to avoid feeling bad that bothers me.

Incidentally and kinda unrelatedly, I will never own another pet after my first experience of paying a vet to kill a friend. It's just not something I could stomach again, necessary mercy-killing or not.
/tangent

[monsno_leedra]

Re: Controversy over Blood Sacrifice

.. Blood sacrifice is an intricate part of my practice, though I call it an 'offering' rather than a 'sacrifice'. I'm not REALLY sacrificing anything when I bloodwork, but I am sticking my vein with a needle, drawing 3mls of blood into a syringe and leaving it in a little pot for Skuld. Or sticking my finger with a needle, milking out a few drops and feeding the runespirits. Or adding a drop to certain spells to cement my connection to them. Or blooding my tools. Or whatever. I use blood on a regular basis, but always with that specific purpose in mind of giving up a piece of myself in order to deepen my connection with my tools, my helper spirits or my goddess.

I do part of that though not the blood pot you've described. Though I suppose when I make an offering of a bit of blood to the land spirits and the land itself it might fulfill the same purpose. In some ways I suppose it's why I see plants different than many do for i've joined my blood many a time with the sap of some plant, whether intentional or not. thorns and briars have tasted it quite often for sure.

Some would argue that I could just as easily do this without blood. But blood is one of the most intimate parts of ourselves. It carries our identity, our life essence, the genetic markers that make us who we are. Yes, there is also DNA in saliva or skin cells or hair follicles, but those are shed naturally during the course of the day. And they don't carry the same intimacy and life essence that blood does. And it doesn't take the same measured self control to draw them from the body

.

I occasionally use skin, hair, saliva or such in some workings but never for the same reason I would use blood. Have to admit though when I do use them I "Collect" them from the source so to speak so they are fresh. For me many times they are used in conjunction with building of things for strength or pliability.

Incidentally, I never use menstrual blood for much the same reason. Menstrual blood has very specific symbolism to me... not only is it waste product of the body, but it is a wasted egg, fertility that has gone unused, nutrients and nourishing media that is past it's used by date and is no longer any good. It's... different to venous blood. The energy is different and it serves a much more specific purpose - one that I don't normally have need to harness.

Menstrual blood for me has always had a "Death" feel to it so it's not something I'd normally use in any positive way or as an offering.

Well I'm an omnivore, I grew up in the country, my husband is a subsistence hunter, and our dream is to homestead (though we don't call it that in Australia) and raise and slaughter our own organic meat (and veggies and all the rest). On top of that I work with animal spirits and use animal parts in my practice. And I'm a vet nurse/tech, thus am involved in the mercy killing of animals on am almost weekly basis.

Bolded mine. It's strange I suppose but killing an animal is harder on me than most things. For that reason I am glad there are people like you who are called to act as pyschopomps and help then slip their earthly garb.

[Rae'ya]

Re: Controversy over Blood Sacrifice

Sure, I accept what you said about third world countries. But you and I don't live in third world countries. In the west, we aren't about to starve to death of suffer horrible diseases for not eating meat. Should we in wealthier countries eat meat when we don't have to, just because someone else somewhere does?.

I am also one of those people who couldn't be terribly healthy without meat. My body doesn't process carbohydrates well (I produce too much insulin, which then makes me hypoglycaemic and in danger of a hypoglycaemic coma and death), plus I'm iron deficient. I can't get enough iron from the copious amounts of spinach and broccoli that I already eat... and legumes are also high in carbohydrates. So how am I to survive well without animal protein?

I respect your decision not to eat meat. It's a personal decision and it's a very valid one. But my choice to eat meat is also very valid. As is anyone else's choice to eat meat. They don't need a medical or physiological reason to make their choice valid.

- - - Updated - - -

Argh you guys are too quick... I'm a few posts behind... bear with me lol

[Unus Mundus]

Re: Controversy over Blood Sacrifice

Please don't put words in my mouth. I talked about guilt as a personal experience, not as an attempt to suggest that you should feel the same.
If you wanna eat meat, do it. Just accept it for what it is. Taking life. You don't have to feel guilty about it, just don't try to pretend it's something it's not.

And don't be so quick to jump down people's throats.



Fair enough. I disagree, but I liked your first post because you at least seem to accept killing for what it is, even if you aren't morally opposed to it. It's all the dancing around words people do to avoid feeling bad that bothers me.

Incidentally and kinda unrelatedly, I will never own another pet after my first experience of paying a vet to kill a friend. It's just not something I could stomach again, necessary mercy-killing or not.
/tangent

I have to ask, who exactly has denied that we are taking life? No one in the thread has denied that they are killing something, eating it, or what-not, no one here is trying to sugar coat it. Your whole point is that you claim we are trying to say "we aren't doing what it looks like we're doing" but we have never made that claim.

[Quetzal]

Re: Controversy over Blood Sacrifice

I am also one of those people who couldn't be terribly healthy without meat. My body doesn't process carbohydrates well (I produce too much insulin, which then makes me hypoglycaemic and in danger of a hypoglycaemic coma and death), plus I'm iron deficient. I can't get enough iron from the copious amounts of spinach and broccoli that I already eat... and legumes are also high in carbohydrates. So how am I to survive well without animal protein?

I respect your decision not to eat meat. It's a personal decision and it's a very valid one. But my choice to eat meat is also very valid. As is anyone else's choice to eat meat. They don't need a medical or physiological reason to make their choice valid.

- - - Updated - - -

Argh you guys are too quick... I'm a few posts behind... bear with me lol

Of course, I make exceptions in my ideals for those with health issues where they physically cannot survive without meat. But the majority of people don't need it to survive in the west, and no, I don't agree with them eating it. I won't make any attempt to stop them, but yeah, from time to time, I'll express my disagreement. Again, I'd prefer it if they admitted what it was. There's no denying, many, if not most, people here tend to avoid thinking about where their food comes from, because they already do feel guilty about it.

And relating to your earlier post, I would prefer it if everyone hunted (not plausible, obviously), rather than relied on slaughterhouses. Only those capable of killing could get their tasty tasty meat then. Guarantee there'd be a lot more vegetarians.

I have to ask, who exactly has denied that we are taking life? No one in the thread has denied that they are killing something, eating it, or what-not, no one here is trying to sugar coat it. Your whole point is that you claim we are trying to say "we aren't doing what it looks like we're doing" but we have never made that claim.

It's the word play. Sacrifice, rather than kill. It implies either choice for the animal, or ownership over the animal. I don't like the word play, that's all.

[Rae'ya]

Re: Controversy over Blood Sacrifice

I do part of that though not the blood pot you've described. Though I suppose when I make an offering of a bit of blood to the land spirits and the land itself it might fulfill the same purpose. In some ways I suppose it's why I see plants different than many do for i've joined my blood many a time with the sap of some plant, whether intentional or not. thorns and briars have tasted it quite often for sure.

Hah! I make annual blood sacrifice to the three rose bushes in my yard lol. They have been so neglected by previous tenants and it's taken me three years to earn their trust. The tea rose still doesn't trust me, but the other two don't bite so much anymore. You should have seen me the first year!

Menstrual blood for me has always had a "Death" feel to it so it's not something I'd normally use in any positive way or as an offering.

I've had very few people see it this way in previous conversations about blood offerings.

I think that to an extent it comes down to perspective... some women can't stomach the thought of bloodletting, and menstrual blood is gross and taboo for them, so in that sense it can still be a valuable source or blood sacrifice for them. But for me... I am intimately acquainted with blood and with blood letting. Not just from a spiritual point of view but from a professional one. I can't help but to see them differently, and the spirits I work with know that.

[monsno_leedra]

Re: Controversy over Blood Sacrifice

I accept all of that too. It's why I had to put up with the guilt of eating meat for a while. I couldn't afford a comparatively expensive vegan diet at the time. But the moment I was able, I stopped eating meat. Most people on the internet can afford to not eat meat. They choose to carry on doing so because they love the taste, and only because they love the taste. And while I don't like it, I'd have less of a problem with it if they'd just stop carrying the "I need meat to live" banner around and just admit, they kill because they enjoy it.

Bolded mine. In truth i'd even dispute that conclusion. The way school systems and such are setting up in many places net access is now stipulated as a need. We're not speaking just for social interaction but net resources being interleaved with many academic usages now. Not counting the many net cafeteria's and such or local libraries that provide net access adn cost little to nothing for public usages.

So there is not a true equation or relationship between one who can access the net and their need for meat to supplement their diets. As far as killing I truly doubt that any great percentage of people really know where their "meat" comes from or how they are processed into the food they eat. Unfortunately, many people are not in a position to change how factory farms are run or how the corporate world utilizes them in feeding the population.

As far as taste is that any different than the person who eats a particular item because they prefer that taste or texture? I love dark chocolate but hate white chocolate yet they are basically the same with simply a different additive. I can't stand liver but will eat other types of meats if they are cooked certain ways but not another way. Granted I tend not to use the religious reasons for avoiding things like pork because of archaic ways of keeping them. People would probably never eat a chicken again if they saw it eat.

And yeah, of course you could be perfectly healthy with meat in your diet. I'm not saying it's bad for you. As someone who eats a lot and doesn't exercise though, it was definitely good for me to give it up. But no, I have no issue with people's health or the lifestyle they lead. I just take issue with meat consumption on a moral basis, and used the anecdotal health example to back it up with something a little less subjective.

But by your argument then you could suggest you'd have arrived at the same results had you eaten less and exercised more. So without taking that course of action then comparing the results side by side are not your conclusions somewhat driven by how you want the results to be vice comparative? Not saying your right or wrong only that if compared side by side your results might suggest something different.

Morality wise not sure one can ever argue any perspective as it only works beneath an individuals given ethics and morality and the conditions that influenced it.

I eat meat because I feel better and enjoy the taste. That is not to say I do not try to eat it in proportion or have meals without it but that is my own ethics and morality about it.

[Raphaeline]

Re: Controversy over Blood Sacrifice

First, I see no problem with animal sacrifice so long as it is done humanely (by which I mean as quickly and painlessly as possible) and the remains are used. My personal pantheon, if you want to call it that, consists of Hindu and Hellenic gods - Hindu gods do not have interest in animal sacrifices, and in ancient practice, most of what we'd call animal sacrifice for Hellenic gods involves receiving through fire only the inedible parts of the animals (in most cases). I sometimes give my gods meat, but it depends on how I obtained it (if it's not factory-farmed meat from the supermarket).
I can say that I would actually prefer to sacrifice almost all of the meat I consumed - if I were able to, I would eat only meat that I had raised, slaughtered, and butchered. I find it far more acceptable to kill an animal that I had raised than to purchase their ground flesh wrapped in cellophane, that's for sure.
The mythical maenads were famous for their own brand of animal sacrifice - the tearing apart of live animals (sparagmos) and consumption of the raw flesh (omophagia). Do I think ripping apart a live animal in dedication to Dionysos is wrong? I can't really give you much of an opinion on that because even the actual ancient devotees of Dionysos weren't believed to have actually participated in this, except in some mostly-symbolic practices that were basically as tame as handling raw flesh.

As stated earlier, many traditions sacrifice the animal and then promptly eat it afterwords. Its not wasted, its food with a special "thanks" behind it in many cases.

I'm sure the dead critter really appreciates the thanks. Like I said, I don't have a problem with killing for food. But sacrifice implies choice. There is no choice in animal killing. Just call it what it is. Killing, not sacrifice.

Choice? No, the animal isn't sacrificing itself, so there is no choice. However, by sacrifice we would mean giving of the soul or "power" of the animal's spirit to the deity before consuming the flesh of said animal. One could literally do it with a plant as well, I'm not arguing for or against animal sacrifice as a whole, I'm just saying that by your argument, killing and sacrificing the "soul" of your food is worse than just killing to eat your food. That I don't agree with.

I see killing an animal as a "sacrifice" in two ways. First, it's a sacrifice in the original meaning of the word, "to make sacred" and is a way of giving credit and thanks to the gods for the food the animal provides. It's also a way of purifying the butchering and consumption of livestock. It's also a sacrifice in the sense that we're used to the word - you're reducing the number of your livestock by one as a way of expressing worship.

Does the animal know that it's soul is being given to your deity? As I see it, that soul is not yours to give. I'm not arguing against it. If ya wanna do a little prayer or a thanks before eating it's flesh, do so. Just don't act as if the animal about to be eaten is being done a favour. Your gods are not it's gods.

I also don't consider the animal itself somehow making a sacrifice... I think it's pretty clear that the animal wouldn't die if it had a choice in the matter, regardless of the traditions in numerous religions that require some kind of imagined signal of permission, like a cow "nodding" it's head or something. I'm not under any impressions that the animal to be sacrificed is agreeing to it any more than food animals - cows, pigs, chickens, etc. - would be interested in giving themselves up for food.
But to me, animal sacrifice is a ritual that is connected to the butchering of animals that are going to be eaten anyway.

For the record, I don't like the eating of meat, "sacrifice" or otherwise.

I could tell.

[monsno_leedra]

Re: Controversy over Blood Sacrifice

I am also one of those people who couldn't be terribly healthy without meat. My body doesn't process carbohydrates well (I produce too much insulin, which then makes me hypoglycaemic and in danger of a hypoglycaemic coma and death), plus I'm iron deficient. I can't get enough iron from the copious amounts of spinach and broccoli that I already eat... and legumes are also high in carbohydrates. So how am I to survive well without animal protein?

I to fall into the hypoglycemic category and really do not care for the notion of a hypoglycemic coma or death. It's bad enough when my blood sugar goes whacky due to blood sugar tests. I find people do not understand how you can bring a diabetic out of a coma by changing sugar but can not bring one out of a hypoglycemic coma by raising sugar for them.

[Auseklis]

Re: Controversy over Blood Sacrifice

Actually, studies have been done to show that plants will take measures to avoid repeated exposure to noxious stimuli.

They may not feel pain the same way that vertebrates do, but that doesn't mean they don't feel pain. Pain itself is medically defined as:



That quote is taken from my veterinary dictionary. And my Pain Management textbook says almost exactly the same thing but uses the term 'sensory' instead of 'physical'.

Notice that definition includes 'emotional experience' and 'potential tissue damage'... which means that pain is NOT just a physical sensation that is dependent on a central nervous system. Pain can be emotional, and entities can feel pain before a stimulus is even applied if they become sensitised to it.

It was not that long ago that people thought animals didn't feel pain.

At the end of the day I think we can pretty much agree that plants do not feel pain in the same way a human or a dog does. People that use the 'plants feel pain' argument against someone who chooses not to kill animals for food is a rather weak and petty argument.

[Rae'ya]

Re: Controversy over Blood Sacrifice

And relating to your earlier post, I would prefer it if everyone hunted (not plausible, obviously), rather than relied on slaughterhouses. Only those capable of killing could get their tasty tasty meat then. Guarantee there'd be a lot more vegetarians.

I actually do agree with this point. I think that awareness of where our meat comes from should be a concern for people, but there are many who don't like to know. I've been to abattoirs, my family raised meat and shipped livestock, I did a day of work in a piggery as part of my training. I have some personal experience with the whole industry as well as the intellectual knowledge of what goes on.

I would drop commercially raised meat in an instant if I could. As it is my husband and I do what we can.. we only buy free range eggs and chicken. Free range beef and lamb is out of our price range though. And even then, free range animals are still generally put through commercial abattoirs, so their life may have been better but their deaths are not necessarily.

I also know that meat and leather are not the only animal products that have made their way into general human consumption.

And I also know that commercial plant raising is not necessarily in the best interests of the plants or the land, either. They are just as important to me.

[monsno_leedra]

Re: Controversy over Blood Sacrifice

Hah! I make annual blood sacrifice to the three rose bushes in my yard lol. They have been so neglected by previous tenants and it's taken me three years to earn their trust. The tea rose still doesn't trust me, but the other two don't bite so much anymore. You should have seen me the first year!

I can imagine. The last place we lived had some carnation roses that went wild and had to be trimmed back all the time. Seems like every time I got near them I got snagged. Surprisingly thistles also used to get me and have done so ever since I was stationed in Scotland back in the late 70's. they don't appear to be really thorny but they snag me quite often, even when I tried to avoid them.

I've had very few people see it this way in previous conversations about blood offerings.

I think that to an extent it comes down to perspective... some women can't stomach the thought of bloodletting, and menstrual blood is gross and taboo for them, so in that sense it can still be a valuable source or blood sacrifice for them. But for me... I am intimately acquainted with blood and with blood letting. Not just from a spiritual point of view but from a professional one. I can't help but to see them differently, and the spirits I work with know that.

Not sure why I see it as death energy other than it's life unrealized. I do know it can be used for curse and control magics but that is more of a pain than its worth in my experience. Then only if its fresh as it contained part of the energy of the woman who passed it but like I said far more trouble to collect then it was worth.

[Vigdisdotter]

Re: Controversy over Blood Sacrifice

Please don't put words in my mouth.

I'm not. You said "Most people on the internet can afford to not eat meat. They choose to carry on doing so because they love the taste, and only because they love the taste." Never mind that your "most" is unsupportable. Is there another reason to say that OTHER then to try and guilt people?

Why should people give up something they enjoy?

If you wanna eat meat, do it. Just accept it for what it is. Taking life.

Sorry, but that's not news. Or shocking. Or about to change my enjoying meat.

And don't be so quick to jump down people's throats.

Oh the irony *chuckles*

[Rae'ya]

Re: Controversy over Blood Sacrifice

At the end of the day I think we can pretty much agree that plants do not feel pain in the same way a human or a dog does. People that use the 'plants feel pain' argument against someone who chooses not to kill animals for food is a rather weak and petty argument.

I don't think it's a weak and petty argument at all. Any more than I think the moral arguments of vegetarians or vegans are weak or petty. There are valid points on both sides of the discussion. Perhaps the notion of causing pain to plants is just as important to a person as the notion of causing pain to a dog. Is it weak and petty to not wish to cause pain? I don't think so.

[Unus Mundus]

Re: Controversy over Blood Sacrifice

It's the word play. Sacrifice, rather than kill. It implies either choice for the animal, or ownership over the animal. I don't like the word play, that's all.

You make an awful big stink over wordplay, and then you add in all the anecdotal things and opinions to the point where its not just wordplay. : P


Although sacrifice may have a certain denotative meaning, its connotative meaning is not the same for everyone. Just because you don't like the word specifically because of the connotation you give it, doesn't mean others should be shamed for using it.


Sacrificing to me would mean thanking whoever the creator/god/deity is for giving me the chance to eat.

You keep saying its just your "little wordplay" problem, but you come in here and try to forcefeed us your ideals along with it. It sounds like a lot more than just irksome wordplay to me.

At the end of the day I think we can pretty much agree that plants do not feel pain in the same way a human or a dog does. People that use the 'plants feel pain' argument against someone who chooses not to kill animals for food is a rather weak and petty argument.

I don't agree at all, and implying that just because plants feel pain a different way makes them less is just the same as saying animals are lesser than humans because they can't vocalize their pain into true words. Eating just plants is a personal choice, but plants aren't really lesser "evils" if you feel eating things is evil or wrong or whatever.