If I get Tom correctly, he simply would suggest that you focus on your own experience of 'reality'. Given that the things to which we direct our attention tend to groom our consiousness in kind, vexing over whether the Bush clan were co-conspirators in 911, or whether Obama was born in Kenya simply isn't going to get you where you want to go.

Tom isn't an authority on UFOs. Why would anyone expect him to be? If he did comment much on matters like that, regardless of what was actually said, it would detract attention and muddy the waters about the matters that he does wish to draw peoples' attention to.

No idea why this thread is titled "Marxist Spirituality".

Montana

in a public sector union myself and greatly benefit from socialistic bait and switch

one has to be able to rise above personal self interest and conflict of interest when debating policy

with all these issues, you have to ask yourself, what is the bait, what is the switch?

_________________
Does this PMR make my butt look big?

This is why this thread is named Marxist spirituality from the first post.You just want everyone to not pay attention to politics but leave that to the big boys. Actually in terms of protecting the little guys, by collective action, we are right in line with MBT principles of protecting free will. Tom says that our most effective interactions for our own entropy reduction is in terms of our personal, up close, interactions. He does not say that we should keep our noses close to home and the ground and ignore the 'evil that men do in the world.

Ted

there are certain areas that Tom seems to have deemed no-go...perhaps to focus his comments and not provide fodder for ridicule or divisiveness

I tried to get him to weigh in on abortion for example - he gave some background regarding the process from conception to early adulthood, and how the IUOC gradually shifts to full attention on the FWAU du jour...but would not state his position directly.

I think with UFOs his only contribution was to say that it may simply be the observer picking up some NPMR information, and that the event may not actually be taking place in this PMR.

I don`t think we were able to get him to comment on crop circles either. Vague memory of it possibly having something to do with the overall process of waking us up to the larger reality.

_________________
Does this PMR make my butt look big?

the process is actually accelerated if you engage it according to your level of understanding - it is completely appropriate for a young person to be engaged in left wing politics - this is how you begin to figure things out - and by this I mean working on a campaign in some way, going to meetings and hearing how things are done

young people involved in right wing politics seem to be somewhat distorted and out of place, unseemly

there is an order and sequence to things - first heart, then head

all heart and no head is great intent-wise, but that means a whole lot of learning at the soul level when nothing goes right - maybe thats a good thing in the big picture

_________________
Does this PMR make my butt look big?

What would Tom say about abortions? He explained the background on the process of associating an IUOC with a fetus so you should understand that. The IUOC only gradually transfers its attention to the fetus. Significant. Also remember that there is a future database. It looks ahead much further than the gestation period of a human so no IUOC need be discommoded by an abortion. Such fetuses are given only the attention that is necessary for comfort, if any. After all, this is a VR and they only exist in potential or as observed in utero by medical technology or putting your ear to the mothers belly to see if you can hear a heart beat. Remember VR. Remember VR. Remember VR! If you were paying attention and not listening with some kind of religious mind set or other agenda over riding your thinking, you have the whole story and explanation. If you don't think you have the whole answer, they you were just not listening.

Ted

What more would Tom say about UFOs?This is the same thing that I have said numerous times. If these encounters are NPMR interactions subjectively experienced, then what more is there to say that that the experience is a subjective interpretation of an NPMR interaction?

Ted

Finally with regards to crop circles. What would Tom in fact have to say. He certainly does not go out and produce them although it is documented that some people do. That they could be created by the VRRE as a way to wake things up is an obvious potential in a VR if they are not explainable as the first case of a hoax or otherwise. What else would there be to say and I fully agree with these limited comments? I see nothing else to say. Should he go out and meet Larry, Mo and Curly, your friendly NPMR crop circle production gang and interview them for 60 minutes?

Ted

Tom has not touched on many other issues, but he never said that you shouldn't explore anything on your own in any direction. Set your intent and viola, you are researching a field of your interest. MBT is not a step by step manual for a discovery PMR conspiracies, circle crop theories and UFO hypothesis. This is a peculiar stuff, but from a PMR/small picture perspective. MBT is about who you are, evolution of consciousness and Consciousness, where we are coming from, what a purpose of this life and what could happen to us, when this life cycle is ended. The rest is some temporary events, which could go on for centuries or decades, to help some of us here to get closer to a bigger reality. If it resonates with you, learn about it and move on, otherwise another belief and attachment could be developed in no time.

Lena

_________________
'Real knowledge is to know the extent of ones ignorance.' Confucius.

personally, my bias is toward choice, and I think the Catholic obsession with abortion by non-Catholics is a trick of ego to take their eye off the ball, which is personal intent, and in this way they have corrupted the original teaching - which is other-loving being replaced by other-damning - the very thing Jesus condemned, ironically

sure, I understand your interpretation, but Tom himself left a lot of uncertainty in the discussion. It is a VR, but we must act as though things are real as a responsibility of being awake. The logic you use could just as easily be applied to post birth sex selection, so I think we still have some work to do to sort it out.

One way to look at it would be for the female, pregnant under unfavorable circumstances, to simply incorporate the point of view of the partially engaged IOUC, and ask the question "Do you really want this diminished life that we would have?"

"or should we collectively move on, not do it, and say we did?" so to speak. Perhaps we could ask...is it fair to the child to not have an abortion?

It seems clear to me that with this model in mind, this is something for the person involved to decide, weighing her and the partially engaged IOUCs needs in balance, make her choice, and for everyone else to fall in and support that decision. This appears to be what the model points to, and it lines up with how educated, decent families approach this problem. Most of other centeredness and love is just basic decency, which is obvious to most...its not rocket science.

maybe part of the issue with this is like other issues...are we adults sharing a discussion, ...but what would happen if an adult conversation was misinterpreted by a high entropy entity - some of the logic of this discussion could justify all sorts of questionable acts, I have mentioned post birth sex selection, then we could consider euthanasia...and beyond.

_________________
Does this PMR make my butt look big?

I see no basis for this statement in what I was describing. That it is a VR does not produce that as a logical result. It just explains the reality, as we would see it, for questions of 'personhood' and such for a fetus. No one is interrupting the life of an IUOC. We have no power here in PMR to do that in any case. The IUOCs, mother and eventually child, have the free will. The fetus is eventually an FWAU, once the IUOC is fully 'engaged'.

Ted

an immature mind could use the not fully engaged thing to justify infanticide should the birth of a child or its health or sex be inconvenient, as the IUOC is apparently not completely engaged until late infancy.

I believe the thoughtful female FWAU must consider that upon conception, an IUOC is partially engaged, and that this engagement process proceeds slowly, with a significant and decisive commitment of attention, albeit not complete, upon physical birth, notwithstanding the constraints of PMR law.

This points to abortion not being a trivial matter, there is indeed an "other" involved, and that best intent must be exercised to avoid pregnancies that cannot be accepted. At the time of Jesus, this could only be accomplished by abstinence, in the modern era it can be accomplished through safe sex.

Upon discovering a pregnancy, action must be taken as soon as possible to minimize inconvenience to the partially engaged IUOC, which is consistent with mainstream secular culture and how decent, thoughtful, sensitive people behave.

Although it is a VR, the awake are under advisement to behave as though it is true, as a constraint of being awake, so we should not drift into "its just a VR" thinking, which leans into nihilism as does "its just data" thinking.

Everything is different according to your innate level of quality. Some girls, upon learning they are pregnant, who may be blank slates as far as religious brainwashing, are simply incapable of having an abortion or giving up the child. And then there is the boy who was looking for a night of fun, who now finds he will become a father, which may be the last thing he wants.

By my observation, it is possible that on a fundamental level, a girl of especially low entropy may not be capable of an abortion, similar to a very low entropy person simply not being capable of eating meat as a matter of instinct - this is a dangerous combination if she is also lacking in self restraint and technical competence.

As always, screwing up leads to intensified learning at the soul level. How much learning do you want?

_________________
Does this PMR make my butt look big?

The point is that this being a VR and there being a probable future data base, there is never a surprise on the NPMR side as to the assignment of an IUOC to a fetus. Thus an IUOC does not have its free will violated. No one was speaking to someone who would misuse this information inadvertently. Some one 'overhearing' would not be in a position of 'knowing' that this is a VR. Someone not knowledgeable would just be doing whatever they wanted to do anyway and already. My point in explaining it was to point out that the information provided by Tom was not incomplete or vague. That was the context of all of my comments. When Tom makes a statement that you find unsatisfactory, you had best dig deeper before you assume that he doesn't want to answer clearly and completely or cannot or particularly has not done so. Tom is like Tom Bombadil, if you have read The Hobbit and The Fellowship of the Ring. As 'Goldberry' said: Ted

Abstinence was NOT the only way to prevent pregnancy EVER even during Jesus' time here as Jesus. Jesus.
Love
Bette

_________________
All That Is
what is?
Consciousness.

Bette is absolutely correct. There have been abortifacients as herbs know since we came down out of the trees. Also very ancient knowledge of the use of animal intestines to make condoms, once we figured out that sex caused pregnancy. Condoms were not invented with the discovery of latex. Here is the Wiki article for discussion of references to historical times. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortifacient

Ted