It is so difficult to accept that our souls may have planned for us to die in horrific ways. Even more difficult that sometimes, it's not in the plan at all. Just being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Nevertheless, thank you for this, Patrick.
By the way, would you ever consider doing Christina Grimmie?
I'll put "her" on the list but I do very few deceased persons, so don't hold your breath.
Yes, I find the idea of accidental death, not planned for by the individual soul, to be frightening, unsettling and sad.
Unsettling, indeed. That brings up other questions. What about documented cases of foreknowledge of death (I'm thinking of Jesus, as well as common everyday people)? The soul always seems to know. Is this information we should try to access? Were the people who could/did access it meant to use it to try to avoid their demise or was it just a friendly "heads up?"
Also, what's the difference between souls who are "sent back" after near death experiences and those who end up accidentally, permanently dead? Is it just the body's lack of viability or is something more at play.
And if the bodies are no longer seen as viable, what's to prevent supernatural repair if the soul wishes to continue their earthly life? (I'm thinking of Natalie Sudman's supernatural body repairs in "The Application of Impossible Things.")
@Rene: Says The Committee:
You will not give yourself information about your death, in such a way you would know or attempt to either avoid it, or bring it closer and sooner.
The sending back of a soul, is the soul's decision, only. The accidental, unintended death which is unreversed, the majority of accidents, of which there are many fewer than humans realize, is a soul's acceptance also. The lack of viability of a body is one part, yes. Given the absence of time, this is not the obstacle it seems to be. Reincarnation is the method to return. The inability to return to the same life is more a concern of the living who remain on Earth, than the returning or remaining-in-Heaven soul.
Supernatural repair is often possible however doing so distorts the human rules of the process, the limits, constraints and conditions of incarnation all souls accept before doing so.
Thank you Patrick. Quite interesting and helpful to know what made this guy tick.
Knowing the motivation of this man provides a level of relief and closure that many others may never get.
One question for you. The respondent often changed the way he spoke of Paddock. Often in the first person, but all in the third person. (I.e. 'I did it" vs. "Paddock did it", does that happen often, when information comes through from a recently deceased "soul"?
No, this was the first time I had a soul come through alternatively, presenting as both the deceased, finished life and the permanent, everlasting soul. Almost the way an act-ress/or might discuss a character s/he played.
Interesting also that The Committee popped in to answer a few questions.
TC popping in to "Opine" would explain part of the shift to 3rd person. Also, the question about being "perched from a new vantage point", also seemed to open the door for a more "multi-dimensional" point of view to come through.
Btw - where did TC jump in? Curious to try and discern the flavor of the personalities.
Absolutely fascinating Patrick , Thank You . Very revealing satisfactory answers , meaning you really got such serious in depth info . I can't imagine living a life with such long term anger deep deep hatred boiling inside . And even more so I can't imagine it being a desired soul choice ! And it impresses upon me how almost everything is soul choice . Interesting that he wrote it into his life plan as just that - a choice he might or might not live out . Fascinating also that you received answers from his human self , his higher self and The Committee
Someone shared this on FB. It's Tom Petty's last interview (conducted a couple days before his death).
He was such a master writer, that he essentially wrote (or spoke) a perfect Eulogy to himself, without not fully realizing it at the time.
It's a hour long, but well worth the time investment, while you wait for Patrick & TC to conduct the "Final" final interview.
Thank you Tim , I'll watch/ listen to every second of it . And I'm sooo excited about Patrick channeling Tom Petty , I know it'll be a great talk between Patrick and Tom , they're both laid back but sensitive and Tom was into investigating spiritual awakening and knowledge , a study that was triggered by George Harrison
It might be a conversation with the soul of Tom Petty if "he" chooses to present that way, or it might come another way or not at all.
PADDOCK QUOTE: "Paddock wanted to kill the Americans he saw as most damaging to America, the ones who most hate immigrants, minorities and who are the most self centered. He knew this crowd would have more of them."
Mr. Paddock, why did you not leave a note detailing your reasons? Other people are now enabled to attempt to speak for you and are running amok with various motives.
From your current vantage point, do you still see Trump voters as the scourge of America? Do you still believe that racism was the primary motivation for people to vote for Trump?
Oddly, many people are now lumping you into the group you hated. They are saying that you personified "white privilege" and that white men are more dangerous than any other group since they commit the most mass murders.
It's a dumb conclusion, but what do you think about the fact that you are being lumped into the group you hated?
I don't attempt to invite back the soul of a deceased person, for follow-up questions. It's like looking a gift horse in the mouth, the way I see it.
Funny that now after Patrick's channeling , while reading news reports I want to correct the information and I have a smarty pants attitude of a know it all . Also I can't stop thinking and realizing wondering how I've probably done a hundred hateful violent things I'd cringe to know about in my other lives . I hope not but is that true Patrick ? I mean have most humans ?
"Many of you would impose human perceptions on acts committed in another incarnation but from the place of your soul, you change NOTHING. Acceptance means acceptance" says The Committee.
Ha, ha...I'm pretty sure I was a crooked used car salesman in a past life. I have had nothing but car issues (lemons) for the last 40 years of driving.
Or is it possible , even common souls choosing all or most lives lived in love and kindness ?
Of course BUT who defines love and kindness?
I just remembered that there was a report of a lady in the crowd at the concert who told people they were going to die that night. She was taken away by security.
Would Mr. Paddock comment on that?
I'm not getting anything on this from The Committee. I've already hung up the phone with the soul of Stephen Paddock. Allow me to slip in a personal, human perspective.
I'd like to stay as far away from him as possible. The energy of what was done is not pleasant. Doing this session was a reminder of the very negative side of channeling, of the bad effect it can have on me, from time to time.
Oh, sorry you had to feel that, Patrick.
I sure didn't get a warm fuzzy feeling from Mr. Paddock. He felt cold and distant and unconcerned. This may be my human interpretation that I can't avoid.
Thank you for sharing your personal, human perspective. I have wondered about how you as the channel might feel about the energies you receive. My skin crawled as I read Paddock's fascinating account, but I was only reading...you had to "be in touch" so to speak. I am sure you and your GAGs are keeping you properly protected from any lingering unpleasantness.
Thank you Patrick, big energy hug to you. I love and appreciate you y T3.
So many of us fighting private battles, & then some that turn so brutally public. What is the scale-tipping difference between SP, Pulse, Klebold/Harris @ Columbine, etc etc etc...and, say.... me?? Is it as simple as CHOICE, or prayer or consultation with GAGs? Is it arbitrary/out of the blue/always a possibility?
Dear God. This interview frightened me more than anything ive read here...y i was disturbed by the initial 5th-something or other link/interview you posted few yrs ago when the humanoids-for-mining info first came into my awareness. This SP talk is a much more profound uneasiness im feeling in my gut, my head. I cant imagine the effects on you, my dear friend ♡ :-(
Im going to post an original poem/spoken word piece about peace, about war; this wore me down but ill always get back up. Love you all, P, TC, & us readers ♡
(In spanish, but eng. available as well)
"La paz no vendrá fácilmente
Me alisté en una guerra fútil
un conflicto privado
creo que abandonado por mis salvadores
y luego solo por hábito
Cuanto más simple era entonces
cuando yo era el centro de mi universo
Y solo herirme era una victoria
No sabía entonces
en mi inocencia
esa "familiaridad genera desprecio"
especialmente para uno mismo
Con sólo una voz débil para romper el silencio
Y el silencio....el fuerte silencio...
no te está hablando ni
No está hablando contigo ni
y el ruido del silencio es demasiado fuerte para escapar -
Son muchas guerras por las que luchamos
¿no hay un fin a la vista?
Estoy listo, estoy fuerte
Esta guerra es mía, solo mía
En el cual yo usé mis muchas caras
Barro bajo los zapatos...
Barro bajo los zapatos
Yo era el arma
la bala, la espada
Yo era el corazón
No en Paz
Soló en pedazos
Yo era el alma destruida
Caminé por mi camino de dolor
Todos los días
Todos las noche
Un refugio, una prisión
La guerra ha terminado pero ahora debo caminar entre las ruinas
para identificar la carnicería
sin sentido de mí mismo
y la pudrición en mi pasado
nutrirán la vida de nuevo en un ciclo infinito como en la naturaleza
universal e inevitable....
No, la paz no viene fácilmente
Pero una vez ganada, no tiene precio...."
[~JMF~ July 31, 2017]
Ahora en inglés:
"Peace won't come easily
I joined a futile war
A personal conflict
I think abandoned by my saviors
Then by habit
How it was so basic
When I used to be the center of my universe
And simply hurting myself was triumph
I didn't know then
in my innocence
that familiarity breeds contempt
especially for oneself
With only a weak voice to break the silence
The silence..strong silence
Speaks not to you or
And the noisy silence is too loud to escape -
We will be heard!
We battle many wars
Is there no end in sight?
I am ready I am strong
This war is mine and only
During which I used my many faces
Mud under my shoes
Mud beneath my feet
I was the weapon
The bullet the blade
I was the heart
Not in peace
Just in pieces
I was the soul destroyed
I walked my painful road
A refuge, a prison
The war is over but I must walk the rubble
To identify the bloodshed
With no sense of myself
and decay of my past
Shall nurture life anew in the infinite cycle of nature
No, peace doesn't come easily
But once earned, cannot be bought ...."
Wow Patrick buen trabajo!! Entendiste, exactemente casi palabra por palabra. What AREN'T you capable of ?! It should be a crime for ONE human to be so damn talented!
PS: 'Talented' can be equally interchanged for Genius/Brilliant; Generous; Articulate; Funny; Humble; Compassionate; Gifted; etc etc etc. I'm pretty sure this is a crime somewhere...punishable by and up to 100 years fame and earnings of up to 100 billllllllion dollars!!!
What role, if any, do brain abnormalities and/or demonic possession play in situations like this?
Says The Committee: "There can be a large role or none. There is no pattern for events humans consider horrific. As an example, we suggest the extermination of Jews and World War Two. There were many instances of thousands of humans killed each day, the acts carried out by humans with no abnormality or problem as humans would define those. Likewise, there are many people with very obvious mental deformities who harm no person, not even themselves."
"In this case", they say, "there were no such conditions or causes, as you suggest."
Interview like these give me shrivels, because they resonate of a rough and barren sincerity... How crude that this guy killed a lot o decent people on account of hate against a straw man... The same straw man that a lot of political parties are erecting one against the other... Dem and Reps speakers should take note that a madman was inspired by their hate-speech to unleash a flood of pain over innocent people ( children in particular). Thke your responsibility, guys.
It also seems that our Life Plans are what they are simply plans.
They can be disrupted by other's actions, even I don't have a measure of the normal probability fo this to happen.
Just wondering how these souls will take these events of life plan disruption, having their life plan derailed. I suppose in a varied manner, and probabily mostly negative.
But...there is a larger plan including also these events? A broader goal serviced by these plan disruptions? And who sets this broader goal, if it exists?
Because if the designer of this "broader goal" are the same souls, we should infer that to have their plans disrupted was indeed their plan, and this is a hell of contraddictory statement...
Time to ask the Committe some clarifications :)
Have a nice day
This is where considering the idea of "probable" or "alternate" selves/realities come into play.
From the perspective of a "soul" (or the Essence or essential aspect of ourselves), multiple (infinite) paths are chosen (like branches on a tree or forks in a road or river).
From that perspective, there are versions of themselves (& ourselves) that experience(d) alternate versions of that concert and everything that followed afterward in that version (or lifetime).
Therefore, the Option that Paddock chose to insert by pulling the trigger(s), is also not inserted (or triggered) in other versions of his life/lives. Versions that we will not fully experience from our physical vantage point, while perched along this particular branch we've chosen to be perched upon.
This concept sort of explains the opening statement to many story lines, "Once UPON a time..."
TC is invited to "check my math" on this point of view.
If this is true, considering the number of people involved (around 20.000 participants to the show), and considering only the option of going/not going to the show, we have 2^20.000 alternate realities unfolding, just from this point.
This is a big concept to swallow, considering that in this way our "oversoul" would be something so vast to be nearly inconceivable, and almost alien, to our "just one point of view" consciousness.
Political parties ATTEMPT what you describe, Pierluigi, but they fail. We can count on the press to seek any aberration and inflate that person or situation like an air balloon for all to see BUT the vast majority of us are not influenced by the bullshit.
No, souls NEVER take the disrupted life negatively. NEVER. The opportunity to incarnate is enormous, and even one day alive on Earth is a prize for our souls.
There is a broader goal, yes and according to what's included on the list of "these events." Mass shootings? Mass deaths from a car bomb? Truck attack? Plain old airport or train station bomb? Restaurant attack? Sports championship? War?
These topics are well covered in the e-books.
The tangled web that is weaved between our souls and our human incarnation.
It seems tangled but it's marvelously well designed, engineered and organized.
It can also leave you feeling numb to any of these experiences as you realise non of it matters. One could think, someone got murdered. Who cares, life goes on. They can just re-incarnate back. It can leave you feeling just generally blasé about human life and experience.
This numbness is something I struggle with. Sometimes I think I know too much for my own good.
I have that numb feeling.
This kind of stuff has been happening for ages. How does one keep on getting upset? My main thoughts are about the difficulty the victims and their families are going through and that those difficulties might never end in this lifetime.
It's a distressing thought, but since I can't change any of it, I just become somewhat unfeeling. The hurricanes haven't helped. I was emotional about Houston and Florida. I have family in Florida and the scenes from Houston were very touching. I was upset when the Caribbean got hit. But then when it came to Puerto Rico, I felt a bit more numb. It just feels like all you can do is make a donation and say prayers, and that's that. Then two women got stabbed in France and then Las Vegas happened.
You just go numb because it's all clustered together and you can't react anymore.
"...marvelously well designed, engineered and organized" has been my impression, or at least what I've been shown by my own GAG's. The capacity for our lifeplan and experience to be altered to take advantage of any quickly arising opportunity, and to either later resume the previous track, or to take another path entirely is a thing of beauty. From the soul's standpoint, it is never the sense of feeling numb and that none of it matters, because it all matters and provides a soul perspective greater than what could have otherwise been obtained. From our human frame of reference, it is simply impossible to contemplate the benefit of events our souls receive even from events which end the physical life our souls were living. No soul feels blase about human lives and experiences, and in fact, it is an honor to obtain the opportunity.
I struggled with the 1st 3rd perspective thing. I think I get it now that you’ve described the effects of channeling his energy. I’ve gone through lots of feelings about this event and his remarks but after more thought I suggest we all pray for him and others like him.
Thanks for doing this interview, Patrick.
My husband said from the beginning it was just a guy who got triggered and snapped. My husband also mentioned the chaos theory and told me to look it up. I did and while I’m not a physicist or mathematician maybe it does describe these types of events. Would you Patrick or The Committee be willing to weigh-in in whether this is part or an example of that theory ?
I'd like to echo the thank you's being expressed.
I hadn't considered the impact on you Patrick, in connecting with this energy, but it makes perfect sense that it could, given the openness that you have to allow to make the connection.
My initial impression was to say, "thanks for taking an energetic bullet for the team", but not sure that that is entirely appropriate in this case (even if it is an accurate analogy).
Thank you again for doing what you do.
His soul has also been interviewed as it where on a Channeling Erik video - https://youtu.be/mPKEliJVfLs
I shared your interview Patrick on Elisa's CE Facebook page as well. So we can all benefit from both.
Yes, quite a few different interviews by other mediums.
All, including the Channeling Erik one, with extremely different answers to the same questions.
One by Pamela Aaralyn in which it is detailed the CIA was involved.
I don't see the "extremely different" answers compared to Veronica's session on CE; where?
The CIA was not involved, nor were any government agencies or malicious groups.
Paddock had a little sympathy with the ideologies of several themes in current events, such as ISIS and the notion certain political views are crazy but he was not motivated by them, was not a part of any of them (e.g. Antifa) no matter how much certain really bad guys would like to ride on Paddock's coat tails.
Didn't Aralyn's interview also mention other shooters on the ground where Patrick's says he was absolutely working alone? She also talks about him being put up to it in exchange for the lives of his family, and Patrick's mentions nothing of the sort. Aralyn's Paddock even talks about moving his gun in a way to spare as many as possible where Patrick's said he went for max kill. To Patrick's credit, the media reports about Paddock's trajectory notes seem to back him up.
Channeling gets hairy. If we can't all get consistent information, then who/what the hell are we talking to?
How can channeling be taken seriously with so many different accounts from this psychopath ? I wonder how the many families who lost loved ones feel about his so called life plan ? Killing innocent people like he did makes me feel so sick to the stomach that nothing said here makes it sound as if its just okay and that was his life plan ?
@joe: Great comment.
Because of so many conflicting accounts, simply dismiss it all, including this website.
Simple and easy, like the deafening roar to confiscate firearms.
Just wanted to pass this along that a few months ago I watched a video with Pamela Aralyn channeling Yeshua. I was surprised to notice that her words were exactly the same as the Tina Spalding channeling that I had watched just the previous day. Pamela Aralyn kept glancing down at her screen while she was doing the channeling. (Tina Spalding always channels with her eyes closed.) Not sure if it was just a weird coincidence, and I do wish her much love and light, but Pamela Aralyn is not my cup of tea.
So this guy accomplishes his contractual agreement, now what!
What’s the lesson to be learned? Also, what’s the purpose of leaving the families not knowing why he did it?
It does seem odd to go through all that effort to make some kind of impression, yet never explain it.
Odd to the sane person, yes. The point is NOT to explain it, and nudge observers to T H I N K.
Not so much accomplished "his agreement" but rather, exercised the option he included in his life plan
Families not knowing leads them, and everyone else, to focus on what a disturbed person can do. It is too easy to hope for a clear answer which fits established ideas and perceptions and ends up accomplishing very little.
I don't agree, Patrick, and here's why.
Most of the people writing and speaking about this event are talking about gun control. Either they're saying the Las Vegas shooting is another piece in a long line of evidence proving we need gun control, or they are enumerating reasons why it won't work. There are fewer of the latter in the mainstream media.
There is little discussion of mental illness being the reason it happened. If shining a light on mental illness was hoped for by Paddock's soul, then it's a fail as far as I can tell.
Even before this particular incident happened, I'd noticed people on the left tend to say the excuse of mental illness is a cop out. They feel that excuse is used to deflect from the need they see for gun control, so they don't like to examine the mental illness angle very much.
You don't agree very little will be accomplished? I hope you're right. Recent experience, however, says the obsession over guns will guarantee mental illness isn't given serious consideration.
I should have been clearer.
I don't agree that not knowing the motive causes everyone to focus on what a disturbed person can do.
From your last comment, it sounds like you also see that the gun control debate is overshadowing the mental illness debate.
If Paddock's soul wanted to shine the light on mental illness, maybe it would have worked better if he had left behind some insane ramblings to be read.
For sure, mental illines is aggravated when you can easily get an entire collection of automated assautl rifle on the web.
Be sure, this mass killing will not be the last in your country, considering how blind is the general attitude toward the root of the problem: very low education over conflict solving, and fantasy over "security" enabled by firearms.
None of them are solved by weapon confiscation, I have to stress. It is more like young boys smoking just because it is cool and prohibited and all of this make them feel older.
So weapons make people feel "able to protect" and "safe". No matter of statistics that shows clearly that a consistent number of US citizens die of weapon incidents, and because a criminal, konwing that his victim could be armed, shots first and is more determined to kill. Statistics also show that being armed DO NOT reduce criminal activity, NOR reduce the number of criminals. All the fuss about "protection" allowed by weapons is what it is: a delusional fantasy.
This, to me, is only a sign of general social immaturity. USA is a young country, after all. Countries with a longer and more troubled history on their back, have (slowly, with time) acknowledged this delusion and ingested into the social attitude.
Pierluigi - there are so many incorrect things in your statement, it must be an attempt to provoke an argument. No thank you.
I suppose that many opinions I expressed could piss off the reader, but my intention is not to provoke quarrels.
Sometimes I'm too blunt with my statements, I have to reduce them
@ Pierluigi - The reason I say it seems to be an attempt to argue is because, for such an obviously intelligent person as yourself, your statements are so wildly incorrect they have to be intentional provocations.
You cannot believe it's possible to buy guns on-line in the USA, can you?
I admit not having double checked this aspect of the issue (weapons bought online). I've read it on the press, stated by a well known Journalist that usually is accurate (Vittorio Zucconi, who lives in USA and writes fro Italian newspaper "Repubblica").
after some research, I've found the origin of the misunderstanding: Paddock legally bought semi-automated weapons, and also legallybought on the web a couple of devices that modify these weapons to become full automated.
It is reported that Paddock regularly passed the federal tests to have these weapons.
It is also reported that Paddock had 23 rifles in is Hotel room, that the shooting took 10 minutes. An automated rifle is able to shoot from 400 to 800 bullets every minute. No doubt why the effects were so deadly.
Ok, enough on the subject.
Have a nice day
That dying/death is a transition to other dimensions not the end, that there is both risk and destiny happening in life, that you should be prepared to transit at any time in your life in order to live your life fully.
The purpose for the families involved - killer and victims to awaken, to grow.
Denis...what you cite is the customary commentary I receive from my GAG's..."every moment living in this body is a blessing, and take advantage of each one!"
I think he explains himself better in the CE interview, i myself dont buy into this "contractual agreement" crap in regards to murdering people, he appears to have been one seriously fucked up dude.. What really freaks me out is how many mental illness REALLY exist on this planet that even the so called experts dont know how to diagnos.. Only my personal opinion, and im no genius !😀
Not a contractual agreement, a life plan option Paddock included. Paddock exercised the option. Screwed up people still have choices, free will and bear responsibility.
Steve, you're not kidding about how difficult it is to deal with mental illness. When the mentally ill person is an adult, no one can force them to seek treatment . . . at least not easily.
Most people don't necessarily know mental illness when they see it either. They might just think the person is bad or evil or has screwed up logic.
Maybe we need to teach some basics about mental illness in high school, so people would be more likely to recognize it when they see it. Even then, we still have the problem of not being able to force treatment on those who need it.
The problem is collective reaction. Announcing any form of mental challenge, even simple depression, becomes a huge permanenet red flag. The default, automatic view is to label anyone speaking of a mental condition as flawed, damaged and defective.
The people WITH the possible mental condition know this. Everyone else makes it clear through action & reaction, that dealing with or even just hearing about mental problems, is TABOO.
Are these shootings part of the shift along with the hurricane's, earthquake,s and volcano eruptions?
Yes, many of these incidents of mass violence (shootings, bombs, trucks, cars, airplanes.etc,) are a component but not every event.
Las Vegas is.
Hi Patrick I was just wondering if you were planning on channel Hugh Hefner it's no problem if you don't plan on it thanks
I'm not planning to channel any deceased person and have done it when asked.
It's ok Patrick I don't know what I would ask him anyway
What do you want to know from Hugh Hefner? What would you ask him?
I've just read some articles on him Linda
They say when you die , you go to a better place, in Hughs case, DOUBT IT !!😂😂
@Steve lol I won't say anything I think Patrick would like this to be a respectable and family friendly website
As long as they let Hef smoke a pipe while he's wearing silk pajamas and a robe, he'll be happy.
How does the Committee explain the reports of multiple gunmen and different windows shot out or being shot from which have led people to believe there were multiple gunmen and a greater agenda at stake?
You don't believe what Paddock's soul said about doing this by himself?
Do all departed souls always answer honestly and truthfully?
Yes, if the soul answers the call, presents "it"self and responds to inquiries. Deception in communication is a feature of speech, not telepathy.
Paddock the Soul being seems wise when he suggests that a start to stopping the mentality of killing is to stop state sponsored executions. The right wing Christians seem to think the same thing can be accomplished by stopping women from killing embryos. I wonder if killing only stops when there is an end to fear, and whether you think it is possible for a human being to live a fearless life, including fearlessness of death. Take refuge in the Buddha. Hope you feel better from the energy.
Opposing abortion isn't limited to Christians, right-wingers or others who do NOT fall into either category, just as there are right wingers, Christians and others who support the ability to terminate pregnancies for convencience.
I don't see fear as the driving emotion, but rather the teaching & learning that killing is a solution to something.
For example, a woman who aborts does it to solve her "problem", a pregnancy. Why is having a baby seen as a problem? No matter; the solution? Abort.
Example 2 - horrible murder or assault? Execute. Problem solved. Well, OK the crime doesn't "un-happen" but at least the perpetrator gets punished.
These examples teach killing, from which observers learn
Your Buddha suggestion is excellent.
She wants to terminate a pregnancy that is unwanted. It is the state of being pregnant that is the issue, not "having a baby." What a male fallacy. No woman kills an embryo for "convenience" unless you are referring to certain intrauterine forms of contraception. It is an idiotic notion. Women choose abortion because of fear and uncertainty. They do not "teach" killing.
Don't pregnancy and birth go together? How is that a fallacy, male or otherwise?
No woman kills an embryo for convenience? Planned Parenthood would be out of business tomorrow, if that were generally true.
The solution is to avoid the pregnancy, isn't it? Contraception is everywhere and demands certain methods be paid by medical insurance, are continuous.
Any type of conception, intrauterine or otherwise, avoids pregnancy and the abortion decision.
If fear and uncertainty of motherhood are what you mean, yes BUT it seems avoidance is much preferable, solved by education and knowledge.
The debate over ending life intentionally has no agreed answer when and if it should happen. A killer of a pregnant woman is charged with 2 counts of murder, yet if the woman herself ends the pregnancy . . .
Overall, ending lives and making that known sets an example.
No form of birth control is 100% effective.
I am pro-choice. Of course I think that abortions should happen in the first trimester.
Erik once did an excellent talk on abortion and why it's important to have the option. Having a baby is a complete life change and as he pointed out, you never know what effect even the pregnancy will have. He said some women can't even stand for very long after the sixth month and might not be able to work to take care of children they already have.
And although modern medicine has gone a long way toward minimizing death in childbirth, it can happen. It is the woman who takes all the effects of pregnancy and childbirth onto herself. No one but her will bear the full effects and possible risks.
It wasn't that long ago that it was all too common for women to die in childbirth. My great grandmother was a second wife to her husband, because his first wife had died. And my great grandmother herself was raised by a stepmother because her own mother had died. My grandmother suffered internal damage from having only two children.
There was a documentary that once said the most risky thing ancient women did was to go through childbirth. So many died.
"The solution is to avoid the pregnancy, isn't it?...Any type of conception (sic), intrauterine or otherwise, avoids pregnancy and the abortion decision."
Oh, Patrick, this just isn't accurate. I know of a woman who got pregnant despite the perfect use of the pill and condoms...simultaneously... due to unusually high fertility. My best friend was conceived by two middle aged parents who were both "fixed." I saw a baby born holding an IUD in his tiny fist.
The best option, which men never seem to want to discuss, is abstinence. But even abstinence is not perfect birth control because of rape. It breaks my heart that men do not want women to get pregnant and do not want us to get abortions either. They only want the right to keep inseminating us at will, then question why we can't seem to keep ourselves from getting pregnant.
We risk life and liberty both to bring children into the world and to prevent them from being born, but both nothing we do is ever good enough.
And this killing is never a solution talk doesnt resonate with me. If someone is trying to kill me but I kill them first in self-defense, did this not solve my dilemma of not wanting to die?
The topic is killing which serves to teach it to observers. Termination of pregnancies was an example, not a suggestion a new topic should branch off from there into a new discussion, but I understand it's a bit of lightning rod subject, so I will expand.
I do NOT believe abortion should prohibited, banned or materially restricted. I DO believe a woman should have the ability to terminate a pregnancy within a certain initial period. I am not impartial on the subject. Nearly 25 years ago my daughter was born at 24 weeks, weighed 787 grams (about 1 pound and 10 ounces) and resembled an aborted fetus, embryo or baby. I prefer to see a baby, because I am a proud father of the most wonderful daughter any father could have. She is more than any father could ever want, and then some. I am completely DISQUALIFIED from suggesting at what stage a pregnancy should be permitted or no longer allowed, but there should be some limit. Terminating a normal pregnancy at, say 35 weeks, is murder, because that's the criminal charge applied to a murderer of an expecting woman. That said, allow me to repeat, abortion should NOT be banned. You cite two excellent examples why.
The procedure should be performed by a qualified professional and that probably means a doctor, but I forgot a LOT of what I learned about obstetrics from neonatologists, just after my wife and I welcomed our daughter into the world. Just imagine an abortion NOT carried out by a qualified professional. I'd rather not.
There is a bigger principle at play; I am vehemently opposed to anyone making medical decisions beyond a patient and her (or his) doctor. A procedure to end a pregnancy SHOULD be a medical decision. God forbid otherwise.
The idea that men keep inseminating women without regard or responsibility does happen, but that says nothing very positive about either "party to the transaction". In that my suggestion that knowledge and education come to bear, applies.
Certainly the best efforts at contraception can fail, but it isn't often. I believe most sane adults agree, avoiding the unwanted pregnancy is a far preferable choice.
Abstinence? Part of knowledge and education.
Your comment has a good deal of "they" and "we" referring to women and men. It's as if we're talking AT one another, in an adversarial way, instead of WITH each other as two people with a common interest. That could stand some improvement.
Men who do not want abstinence, contraception used OR the pregnancy, baby and ensuing responsibility? They're JERKS. To believe a man has a right to impregnate a woman at his sole discretion is a mentality befitting a caveman.
Lastly, self-defense is not killing. Effective self defense STOPS killing and also serves as a deterrent to future attempts. Preparation for safety and security beget . . . safety and security. Like anything, our intentions bring about their goal. Fear of attack brings about attack, concern for poverty creates more poverty; to what we put our mind, we generally get. Self defense creates protection.
Killing serves as an example not to the killer or victim, but TO THE OBSERVERS. When humans finally stop ending life intentionally, killing will decline drastically. We are not animals acting on instinct.
Thank you for clarifying your position, Patrick. It seems we agree on more points than not. As far as my adversarial phrasing, you said it best - lightning rod subject. Taken in a vacuum, your previous comments were alarming, but I understand better now that you've elaborated. Relations between men and women could certainly stand some improvement. Lines often get drawn between the two parties, sometimes unwittingly, but those are the breaks of living in a patriarchal society/world - men attacking, women defending, and vice versa.
I, too, believe that abortions should always be performed by a medical professional. My great-grandmother told me firsthand about her coat hanger abortion, so I don't have to imagine the alternative too hard. Poverty, segregation and fear of the church made it impossible for her to get a medically safe abortion, and I'm glad that today's women are less likely to have to go through that.
And I wholeheartedly agree that avoiding pregnancy is far preferable. It's why most women risk their health consuming loads of risky but highly effective hormonal contraceptives. To most, it is far preferable to an unwanted pregnancy or undergoing surgery to have a fetus removed, and terminating the life of your child. No sane, rational woman skips to the abortion clinic with bells on.
I partially agree with your statement that the fault of reckless insemination of women can lie with both parties. Women should insist that their partners use protection or do not engage in penetrative sex if they don't wish to become pregnant. However, even within the confines of marriage or other committed relationship, a woman can be coerced or physically intimidated into unprotected sex. And if that sounds unlikely or far-fetched, I have to admit that *I* am not impartial on the subject, as this is exactly how I was conceived. And I have nothing but "very positive" things to say about my mother.
Anyway, speaking more on the original topic, thank you for clarifying the meaning of killing for the sake of the observer. However, one last point gives me pause. To me, your definition of self-defense - "STOPS killing and also serves as a deterrent to future attempts" - sounds equivalent to the intent behind capital punishment, which Paddock advised against in his channeling. Does killing those who have killed others not prevent that person from killing again, and deter similarly minded people from killing in the future?
I get that killing to set an example can be wrong when the purpose is more punitive than preventative, but doesn't capital punishment kind of accomplish both?
Prison stops a killer from repeat performances. Capital punishment is not punishment, rather it releases a soul into Heaven. The numbers of wrongly convicted and wrongly executed people are not insignificant. It's also vastly more expensive to execute than imprison a convicted murderer.
Your example of women forced against their will or preference is more a violence problem. Aborting such a pregnancy might solve the undesired effect BUT what about the abusive male?
Another problem entirely.
Another problem, indeed. The CENTRAL problem. We want to eliminate violence, but that seems impossible. So we settle for eliminating the violent person instead.
The million dollar question, then, is how do we eliminate violence without eliminating people? The answer, I feel, lies in some sort of significant cooperative effort; but how can such an effort be initiated when it's only the nonviolent people - not the violent ones - who are even asking the million dollar question?