| Author | Message | ||
    Littlefawn Member Post Number: 6 Registered: 08-2014 |
Learnmore12, Thank you for your reply. I think I would be called a Nazi if I did that, since Eugenics was the purpose for the holocaust. Thanks anyway, I'm sure a topic will emerge that I can truly handle the scope of in a thesis rather than a dissertation. Peace and Love, Little Fawn | ||
Littlefawn Member Post Number: 7 Registered: 08-2014 |
Michael_horn, Sorry I had an incomplete post. Thank you for your reply and info on the group in the U.S. I seemed to have struck a cord with Mr. Green's name. I do not know him, only seen some interviews. Please tell Billy that I am truly sorry that there have been opportunists who have taken advantage of his story. I saw an interview with Billy and Randolph Winters that Billy did in English. He seems like such a warm, loving human being, like a teddy bear! The more I read about Billy's teachings, the more questions I have. I appreciate in advance for eveyone's patience. Peace and Love, Little Fawn | ||
Hawaiian Member Post Number: 214 Registered: 05-2011 |
Littlefawn I normally do not participate in this forum for various reasons, but was influenced by your status that I can relate to. I am working on a few details on my own. Just be aware that all of the corresponding forms of creational material and non-material elements are currently embodied in every human being, yet the vast majority are not even aware of it or deny its existence through illogical reasoning either by ego or religious contamination. The material, half-material and pure non-material (spirit) are all within the structure of the material human being along with its non-material counter parts (see Schema Chart for detailed description) The following article may be of interest to you. Dr. Michael Bloomfield’s research on difference between female and male brain utilization http://www.bbc.com/news/health-25198063 There are differences in the way males and females process information based on unique characteristics inherit to their genetic attributes. Females tend to utilize both hemispheres at once, often crossing over between these two halves which are ideal for multitasking while male brains are wired for front to back processing with little cross over, which is ideal for single tasking like navigation. Another point to consider besides this study is the fact that females are more sensitive in utilizing their sixth sense of intuition and seventh sense of primary telepathy especially for those who have children during the early stages of development when speech has not been formulated yet. Therefore the mother has to rely on other forms of communication in which the two sensory avenues have just been mentioned. This is one advantage women have over men since the higher six and seventh senses are critical in one’s evolutionary status and evolution. Males rarely recognize these parameters even though such experiences and knowledge are currently stored in their memory banks via the subconscious when their spirit form was incarnated as a female personality in the past. That is the process of human evolution which incorporates the fundamental attributes of both the male and female properties in their relevant forms so that the brain with all of its relevant parts, the pineal gland, material conscious, subconscious, psyche and others including the appropriate male and female brain connections patterns of utilization so that the spirit-form also evolves. The external environment is also important as it too has significant factors in either promoting or degrading the internal development of the human being. Degenerates who control and maintain power for themselves at the expense of others does not promote creational evolution, but rather restricts the process. There are ways to rectify such imbalances and it’s not just maintaining a strictly neutral, balanced life style without applying counter measures to such degenerate events or activity. Sometimes a “negative” response to a negative event is required to balance it out so that a positive emerges. The answers lay in the subconscious realm where connections are linked amongst the participants in time, space and dimensions across the universe and each in their own attributes have the potential to resolve it in their own particular way just the same in principle as the Peace Meditation, but a step further when taken into consideration the full spectrum of equalization of all events both past, current and future. It is the material conscious that produces the required element to start the process moving in the right direction. | ||
Corey Member Post Number: 702 Registered: 12-2009 |
Little Fawn, Lots of well educated people have commented on Earth's overpopulation problem w/o being called a Nazi, Lester Brown, Donella Meadows, the Union of Concerned Scientists, to name a few. Some have validated Billy's far seeing warnings about overpopulation and climate catastrophe etc, (or are at least beginning to validate) making them less of a taboo! Donella Meadows and her team ran computer simulations on what would happen if we don't lower population levels and switch to a sustainable pattern of living/economy, and in every case (including if we wait too long), there was a complete collapse of everything, economies, sources, sinks, etc. Just like FIGU says :-( FIGU's recommendations for population birth rate checks etc. may seem extreme at first, but if you contemplate the real issues, they seem fair to the intellectual and rational human beings. The very same recommendations are an old system utilized by the Plejaren. Most "outside" (non-FIGU) sources recommend limiting families to 2 or 3 children per couple, which is a start at least and probably more acceptable to the general populace if they were aware of the truth of the issues regarding negative consequences of overpopulation. Mentalblock: Bewusstsein, Gedanken, Gefühle, Psyche Bewusstseinblock: Charakter, Persönlichkeit, Unterbewusstsein, Ego, Gedächtnis "Lehrschrift" page 124 Ratio: Verstand, Vernunft, Klugheit, Moral "The Psyche" page 216 | ||
Corey Member Post Number: 703 Registered: 12-2009 |
Hawaiian, You got the six and seventh senses wrong, they are not as you state. If you are going to try and teach people, and give the appearance of relaying information from the material, make sure you give the correct information to avoid disinformation and confusion. Also your post does not contain iterations on what are your ideas and thoughts, and what comes directly from the material. Mentalblock: Bewusstsein, Gedanken, Gefühle, Psyche Bewusstseinblock: Charakter, Persönlichkeit, Unterbewusstsein, Ego, Gedächtnis "Lehrschrift" page 124 Ratio: Verstand, Vernunft, Klugheit, Moral "The Psyche" page 216 | ||
Billwilson12 Member Post Number: 53 Registered: 07-2013 |
Newinitiation Post Number: 1183 Sorry I missed this post, I have found many of the post you have made on the UFO forums and found that I get much more joy from your time spend here. I have read all of the predictions and like yourself I have read all the mentioned works that I can find plus many others. I am finding that the creational information has been pasted down to us for a very long time. We just have been missing the keys to see the bigger picture. Lately I have enjoyed the work of danny witten on youtube he has found a wonderful path but is lost with Mr. Halls glory and can not be gently pushed in the more enlightened path, but he still keeps coming up with cool stuff just the wrong answers for what he is seeing. Thank you for the more round table style of responses no leaders just students at the dinner table, as per the predictions we all have a rough path ahead and will need much knowledge to move forward as humans. May you find harmony today. Bill Wilson 123OM | ||
Earthling Member Post Number: 865 Registered: 05-2008 |
Under the WW3 topic, regarding the talk about homosexuality and marital rights and in particular to the comment - "That Herr Meier doesn't endorse prejudice against homosexuals has been used in argument after argument on this forum to promote homosexual marriage. I don't see his comments as supporting that at all." The Goblet of the Truth seems to contradict that understanding of Meier's stance towards same-sex marriage. "And a bond of purely same-gender concordance (partnership) is permitted, thus between woman and woman and between man and man so that they live together in communality with equal rights in all things; however, the bond between man and man shall be such that they do not change their appearance (nature) in order to be able to bear children, so that they do not violate the laws and the regulation of the primal power (Creation); and in same-gender concordance between partners it is permitted for sensuality (sexual doings) to take place as with heterosexual concordance. And those of you who cannot afford or do not want to enter into a certified bond (officially certified, certified by the authority), then it is rightful for you to enter into a valid bond (marriage) without evidence (authorisation) from the authorities, and to have all the same rights as those who have evidence from the authority; thus this also applies to bonds (marriages) between woman and woman and between man and man." http://beam2eng.blogspot.com/ Bruce | ||
Matt Member Post Number: 450 Registered: 04-2006 |
Bruce, I can't talk about Michaelhelfert. My comments were not against homosexual marriage but against homosexual behaviour in public places (and TV) where children are. I do not think it is appropriate for children to see things like two men passionately kissing each other. There are also people like myself who do not wish to see these things too. My opinion is it should not be happening in public. That is what I meant by homosexual's should not have all rights. But that is only my opinion and I could be wrong. In the next round of questions to Billy I will ask him if it is appropriate for children to see this type of behaviour, then we will know if it is appropriate behaviour in public places. | ||
Michaelhelfert Member Post Number: 450 Registered: 09-2011 |
Bruce, as sick as it is, reluctantly I concede your point, as sick as it is. Apparently Herr Meier endorses homosexuality to the extent of supporting homosexual marriage, and from my own previous questioning of him, he apparently even endorses homosexual men adopting children. It seems to me that Herr Meier is more concerned with appeasing the designs of homosexual men who want unfettered access to young boys than he is concerned with the psyches of boys who are damaged for their lifetime by being forced to live in such a household. I find his comments on this matter more than merely inconsiderate, in light of the long-term ramifications of what he endorses, they are extremely unfortunate. For men to want to 'marry' each other, well that just makes no sense to me whatsoever. You are not going to convince otherwise. Whatever you want me to believe, I want nothing to do with it, zero part of it. I still think that for men (especially) to be repulsed by male homosexuality is perfectly normal, natural, even instinctual, and should not be suppressed. Life | ||
Andrew_hua Member Post Number: 23 Registered: 12-2013 |
Matt, Would you also find the sight of two women kissing disgusting? Be reminded that, naturally, children are less intolerant and judgemental of "things". | ||
Michael_horn Member Post Number: 892 Registered: 07-2009 |
> Michael, You're entitled to your opinion but I don't know that you can substantiate your claim that they "want unfettered access to young boys", as I'm not aware that this is hte means by which pedophiles are operating as a rule. In fact, with the adoption of children there probably is, at least in some places, more oversight and accountability, something that the pedophiles aren't encumbered with when they molest children who certainly aren't theirs. | ||
Matt Member Post Number: 452 Registered: 04-2006 |
Andrew, I find the sight of two women kissing a little disgusting but nowhere near as much as two men doing it. Figu Bulletin 2 says homosexuality should not be looked upon as being disgusting. It does not specify if it is referring to the "idea" or seeing the "act" of homosexuality as should not be disgusting, or both. I find the sight of two men kissing disgusting. Knock me if you want but that is how I feel. I have no problems being friends with a homosexual man as was the case at my old work. I just don't want to see it. It always makes me cringe. To the second part of your question. But is it psychologically good for children to see it? We will see what Billy says about the matter when I asked question. I do not pretend to know his answer. | ||
Earthling Member Post Number: 867 Registered: 05-2008 |
Matt, we're talking about personal opinions, likes & dislikes, acceptable behavior, what one is accustomed to or has been exposed to, what one has been taught, etc., and so when one sees a same-sex couple kissing, it is or isn't a big deal. When I was growing up, there were adults who frowned upon any public displays of affection that went beyond a publicly-acceptable short kiss and they had their rules of etiquette about that. Even today, everyone draws different lines on whether PDA crosses the line into exhibitionism, no matter if it's a same-sex or opposite-sex couple. I would think young children wouldn't think twice about same-sex PDA if it doesn't cross the line into behind-closed-doors behavior. Per Billy's writing below, children have no problems with color differences, size differences, much of any differences. In fact, there is much adults could learn from children as opposed to us trying to impose our likes, dislikes, hang-ups, etc. on them. http://au.figu.org/children_grownups.html . http://beam2eng.blogspot.com/ Bruce | ||
Matt Member Post Number: 453 Registered: 04-2006 |
Is it good for children to see things like this? There are many music videos like it. It's getting worse as time goes by. Christina Aguilera - Beautiful https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAfyFTzZDMM I like listening to the song on radio in my car, but cannot watch video when I'm watching music videos channel on cable. I have to flick it over to another music channel. "I still think that for men (especially) to be repulsed by male homosexuality is perfectly normal, natural, even instinctual, and should not be suppressed." I think so too. | ||
Grantman Member Post Number: 11 Registered: 09-2013 |
For all of the spiritual teaching's wisdom and knowledge, I think that it might be helpful to take a break from studying it or dealing with anything related to FIGU at all sometimes. Certainly, Billy and FIGU are a monumental gift to Earth and humanity in general, and will help usher in a period of unprecedented peace and advancement in the coming centuries. And even more certainly, Billy and FIGU members have sacrificed a lot for the important mission of spreading the truth to the unknowledgeable people of Earth. But ultimately, FIGU is only a messenger of the truth, and does not embody the truth itself. If someone truly wants to experience the depths of their consciousness and observe the beauty of the universe, they do not need FIGU or any other organization. The wonders of the universe and the unfathomable depths of human consciousness exist entirely independently of Billy or any other single human being or organization. If we truly want to live freely and guide ourselves to the truth of all truths, we should use FIGU and the spiritual teaching only as an introductory launchpad, from which we ourselves guide the rest of the journey without chaining ourselves to the teachings and occupying ourselves with things we have never first experienced in our own lives. In other words, we should--through meditation and life itself--develop ourselves at our own rate and through our own perceptions, and lead a simple existence without overloading ourselves with information from FIGU, which may confuse and hurt us more than it helps us. But ultimately this is my own opinion, and everyone is free to decide for himself or herself what to do, because only the individual knows what is right for himself or herself. | ||
Earthling Member Post Number: 868 Registered: 05-2008 |
Michael, I don't know if Meier has spoken or written about the current issue of 'supporting' same-sex marriage and the right to marry, but I do think he is saying and writing that such does not violate any laws of creation and the recommendations thereof and so same-sex marriage is indeed aligned with creational laws and in that being that the union fosters the consciousness-evolution of both humans as it does with same-sex couples. The whole subject may disgust you and many others http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/09/06/churches-supreme-court-gay-marriage/15215631/ , but even you can concede that all humans, since all humans are endowed with a conscious-consciousness and therefore evolution-capable creational spirit-form, are entitled to a consciousness evolution, not just those who are born with the inclination towards the opposite sex. Regarding your hyperbolic, iow, senseless going-too-far point of accusing Meier with supporting pedophilia, the facts are that heterosexual pedophilia is far more prevalent (11 to 1) than homsexual pedophilia http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1556756 and you are essentially saying that by supporting same-sex marriage, one also "is appeasing the designs of heterosexual men who want unfettered access to young girls and are not concerned with the psyches of these unfortunate young girls who are damaged for their lifetime by such abuse". And regarding your illogical flailing and failing point of me 'wanting you to believe' this or that; your beliefs are your choice(freewill) and yours alone, whether or not they align with creational laws or recommendations for the benefit of the human being and if our thoughts and thinking do not align with creational laws, we must ask ourselves whether they are even our own thoughts, because in the end, what we sow/think, that we will reap. http://beam2eng.blogspot.com/ Bruce | ||
Michael_horn Member Post Number: 894 Registered: 07-2009 |
> We're certainly at a point in our individual and collective history where having hte benefit of the wisdom of others far wiser than ourselves can assist us to attain it on our own. When you go to school to study an advanced science or other demanding subject, you don't necessarily decide prematurely that you can no longer benefit from those who have already accomplished more than you do and who have made the effort to impart as much knowledge and assistance as possible. In every case, it's solely the repsonsibility of the person, the student, to utilize, develop, grow and contribute to their own and the collective knowledge and evolution. | ||
Michaelhelfert Member Post Number: 451 Registered: 09-2011 |
Bruce: this is sophistry used to make a point. My argument targets homosexual men in particular because, as has been pointed in the Meier material, there is a qualitative difference between male homosexuality and female homosexuality. A marriage is a special relationship between a man and a woman. Anything else is... something else. Once the idea of marriage is stretched to include, well, other things, we can say a 'marriage' is all sorts of things. If two men can 'marry' (and 'divorce') each other, why not three or four? If three or four men can 'marry' (and 'divorce') each other, why not more? Is it beyond the reckoning for 'marriage cooperatives' to spring up, wherein everyone is 'married' to everyone else for a while? You could even throw other species into the mix. Why not? You want to be fair, don't you? If being in such a relationship generates much joy for you and your furry friend, then fine, wonderful, I am glad you found what makes you happy, but it AIN'T a marriage, no matter what you call it. The problem comes when you adopt children into this new, modern, progressive concept of a 'marriage'. Such civically sanctioned relationships are adult concepts, and perhaps they provide the emotional support the modern homosexual male adult needs, but they are confusing for children who are instinctively looking to Mamma to care for them, learning from Dadda on how to act. Maybe it's not fair that men can't have children of their own, but it's biology. While it is true that pedophilia is more prevalent among families who feel less connected to each other, and that homosexual men are well-known to predatorily jump partner-to-partner-to-partner-to-partner as if looking for something they just can't find (which especially puts young boys at risk), it is also true that not all homosexual men are sexual predators, certainly not. But the argument against the State placing young children (whose psyches is already delicate through life's circumstances) into homes without the balance of both a natural mother and a father, this argument doesn't hinge on the homosexual male's propensity for sexual predation, but rather on the lack of ability to impart a balanced parentage, a parentage which builds a healthy, grounded psyche in the next generation. Condoning male homosexual adoption ignores the (real, as in undeniably existent) natural emotional needs of the children. Such a social atmosphere is far too fraught with problems, both surrounding gender and social childhood development, problems which many homosexual men carry over from their own childhoods, and are still grappling with themselves. Pushing this onto the next generation in order to help 'validate' the emotional needs of homosexual men is shortsighted, one-sided, very inconsiderate to say the least. Allowing homosexual men to adopt children may be okay theoretically, or in an ideal society, but we don't live in an ideal or theoretical world. Life | ||
Darren Member Post Number: 459 Registered: 07-2009 |
Billy once said something along the lines of that two homosexual parents can be better parents then some female/male ones. I think he was referring to a child is better off being raised in a loving family environment then in one that is not. But I think there must be some psychological down sides for a child being raised/adopted into a family where there are two male fathers and no female mother. Looking back on my childhood I can see the benefits I had from having my female paternal mother there for me. I don't think it matters much if it is the child's biological mother or not as long as it is loving. I cannot answer this question as a baby but if I had to be adopted into a LOVING family I would always insist on male/female adoption parents. Far in the future when most/all parents are responsible and loving, I would not be surprised if male homosexual parents will not be allowed to adopt a child. What's best for the child is paramount I think. | ||
Darren Member Post Number: 460 Registered: 07-2009 |
I meant gay couples will not be allowed to adopt a child. | ||
Earthling Member Post Number: 870 Registered: 05-2008 |
Michael, regarding "If two men can 'marry' (and 'divorce') each other, why not three or four?" ... 1st of all, the same could be said of opposite sex marriages, as goes on in Plejaren culture, Mormon, Islam, etc. and I assume that's what you were referring to as sophist and therefore taking things too far and out of context to make some point that has nothing to do with following creational laws or recommendations. I don't see how it applies to the rights of human beings to put themselves in an evolutive mode of living and life-conduct as opposed to one that has gotten out of the control of the good human nature as also can happen in heterosexual marriages and relationships. Darren brings up the point regarding same-sex adoption that Billy said same-sex parents can be as good or better than opposite-sex. Naturally they would have special challenges which would have to be dealt with and overcome but the same can be said for opposite-sex parenting depending on the child, the parents, the whole environment. If the parents are responsible, loving, interested in following creational laws and recommendations, that is far better for the young parentless human to be in such a situation than to remain in an orphanage waiting for a same-sex family adoption because we indeed do not live in an ideal society. Or perhaps you think an orphan would be better off be adopted by this loving opposite-sex couple for example? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VbwTMJroTbI http://beam2eng.blogspot.com/ Bruce | ||
Str0323 Member Post Number: 17 Registered: 02-2012 |
Bruce, I agree with what you said regarding adoption by a same sex couple. I must admit though, I didn't feel this way prior to me finding the spiritual teaching and finally thinking for myself. However I would disagree with a surrogate being used by a same sex couple to create a child. I think that would go against a creational law. Meaning that a new human being should be guaranteed the right to a father and a mother, for their evolution among other things. Peace Scott Reed | ||
Michaelhelfert Member Post Number: 452 Registered: 09-2011 |
Bruce, I am not sure you understood what I said. Perhaps my comments were written in abit too harried a manner to be easily understood. Perhaps they were somewhat muddled in their presentation. If so, I apologize for that. Let me restate my post, edited a wee bit for clarity, so that you can better figure out what I said. Bruce: you used sophistry to make your point. My argument centers on homosexual men in particular because, as has been pointed out in the Meier material, there is a qualitative difference between male homosexuality and female homosexuality. A marriage is a special relationship between a man and a woman. Anything else is... something else. Once the idea of marriage is stretched to include, well, other things, we can say a 'marriage' is all sorts of things. If two men can 'marry' (and 'divorce') each other, why not three? If three men can 'marry' (and 'divorce') each other, why not more? Is it beyond the reckoning for 'marriage cooperatives' to spring up, wherein everyone is 'married' to everyone else for a while? You could even throw other species into the mix. Why not? You want to be fair, don't you? If being in such a relationship generates much joy for you and your furry friend, then fine, wonderful, I am glad you found what makes you happy, but it AIN'T a marriage, no matter what you call it. The problem comes when you adopt children into this new, modern, progressive concept of a 'marriage'. Such civically sanctioned relationships are adult concepts, and perhaps they provide the emotional support the modern homosexual male adult needs, but they are confusing for children who are instinctively looking to Mamma to care for them, learning how to act from Daddy. Maybe it's not fair that men can't have children on their own, but it's biology. While it is true that pedophilia is more prevalent among families who feel less connected to each other, and that homosexual men are well-known to predatorily jump partner-to-partner-to-partner-to-partner as if looking for something they just can't find (which especially puts young boys at risk), it is also true that not all homosexual men are sexual predators, certainly not. But the argument against the State placing young children (whose psyches are already delicate through life's circumstances) into homes without the balance of both a natural mother and a father, this argument doesn't hinge on the homosexual male's propensity for sexual predation, but rather on the lack of ability to impart a balanced parentage, a parentage which builds a healthy, grounded psyche in the next generation. Condoning male homosexual adoption ignores the real (as in undeniably existent), natural emotional needs of the children. Such an atmosphere is far too fraught with problems surrounding both gender and general social childhood development, problems which many homosexual men carry over from their own childhoods and are still grappling with as adults. Pushing this onto the next generation in order to help 'validate' the emotional needs of homosexual men is shortsighted, one-sided, and very inconsiderate, to say the least. Perhaps allowing homosexual men to adopt children might be okay theoretically, or in an ideal society, I don't know about that, but I do know that we don't live in an ideal or theoretical world, nor will we for quite some time to come. Life I don’t wish hurtful insult upon anyone. I simply don’t think that groups of homosexual men should be adoptive parents. That said, I think I have about said my peace on this topic. Life |
