What became of David Hudson

All your Sociology, Law, and Political Science on this forum. (Except if you think it's a conspiracy, that is)

Re: What became of David Hudson

Postby DocPtah on Thu Apr 30, 2009 2:28 pm

Some insightful comments, Dorman... you must be on a roll. :mrgreen:

But when it comes to the bit about princes and princesses being ever so slightly egotistical... I really must refer you to a song by the pharaoh's daughter from Aida: My Strongest Suit. If you're not already familiar with this one... you really must watch it. Come to think of it... even if you are familiar with it... WATCH IT!

Meanwhile, the middle-class baboons were also interesting. There is, however, a concern that perhaps the baboons were not living in as sophisticated manner as some humans. Perhaps the reason so many people act like animals is that they were an animal in their past life... and they haven't quite learned to be human.

Meanwhile, the critical question posed by Dorman
"why should I live harmoniously with others, rather than going after what I want, even if/when I have to step on anyone else to acquire it?"

might indeed be answered by assuming -- as apparently Dorman has -- that everyone experiences multiple lives in which... at some point... in one of those many, many incarnations... a particular soul finally wises up and decides that there's something in this universe that extends beyond "survival of the fittest"... something that might in fact supersede and make such a law inapplicable. Such a realization would quickly surface once one realized that a lack of survival is not even remotely a problem... that "failure to survive" is a temporary experience... and that ultimately everyone gets another shot at the brass ring... in fact many, many shots... until they actually have it on their finger. (And of course a laurel wreath was well... just for effort.)

I suspect Dorman may have asked the question that has finally resolved... in my mind, at least... a question of what role these so-called "laws of nature" actually play. Possibly just a bit of drama for entertainment purposes.
User avatar
DocPtah
Supreme Overlord
Supreme Overlord
 
Posts: 407
Joined: Mon Jan 28, 2008 12:00 am
Location: Colorado

Re: What became of David Hudson

Postby ozziegem on Fri May 01, 2009 4:57 am

Its awfully fun to think so !!!!......I think ...funny that....I thought that ...or did I ..must of, their is no one else here..

Now I think I better DO something ...Chow

Gem
ozziegem
Brandmeister
Brandmeister
 
Posts: 208
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2009 3:22 am

Re: What became of David Hudson

Postby Kompilieren on Thu May 07, 2009 4:04 pm

Hello Everyone,
DocPtah wrote:Just a reminder...
there are several naturally occurring (and no I do not mean drugs) medicinal herbs and diets that been proven affected with relieving adverse side effects of thyroid/thymus/pineal conditions. But, they tend to thin the blood so excise caution, and again this solely depends on her condition that these diets may be beneficial.

PLEASE refrain from offering medical advice of any kind on these forums. No exceptions.


In a previous forum I had mentioned a playful little tid bit about staying from the forums for a days, but I did tell Doc in a PM that I will apology for the lack of forethought I exhibited giving any information regarding medical advice... it is a sticky situation and gets rather messy extremely fast. I hesitated and should have listened more closely to my own internal warning. To everyone who utilizes these forums, and again to you DocPtah, please accept my humble apologies on this matter as I know the extent of the repercussions.

Thank you all, and again thank you for the reminder Doc.
~K~
Kompilieren
Hesperian
Hesperian
 
Posts: 82
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 8:46 pm

Re: What became of David Hudson

Postby Angel on Mon May 25, 2009 8:42 pm

Before this very insightful thread comes to a bit of a lag , it has been laid upon my head and heart to mention a few things to all of us on the topics of Human nature , what the purpose is for it and whether it is of any importance to our journey.. really. Also, some closing remarks on the David Hudson issue.

Firstly, let me make this quite clear, human nature is not an issue of debate. If you are human ,imho, you are not born having an inherent survival OF THE FITTEST mentality, nor is it a NATURAL desire to kill, be killed, see others suffer, or see them die. It is not part of human nature. HOWEVER, it is very much part of the 3rd dimension veil (forget or remember not, prior life spans) and as such that humans do naturally have a natural survival instinct. This is clearly done in order to obtain an advanced or intense experience while here. Many deep lessons on love are gained directly from the thought and or reality of death of self or that of the ones we love and even for life itself.

It is only in conditioning or in circumstances of life, that we become possible as humans of the INHUMANE acts or thoughts in the characteristics described above. If we are conditioned to think a man must be the fittest to achieve some place on the evolutionary scale , this then is usually adopted as our own ways to be. If we are suppressed by government, religion. or education, we will usually have a difficult time gaining the fullest potential in ourself. If we live everyday, in a situation where we must kill or be killed to survive the life we live, I can assure you a human being will kill. This does not make it part of human nature and that my friends, is the reason, I truly believe we must get back to the basics in defining what it really is and means to be a human being. We are so far away from that basic place, that even the highest of intellectual or spiritual among us, need to think on or debate the characteristics of human. This in and of itself is what the elite or the powers running the planet have kept us from understanding fully, and it has been done in order to keep us in their control and from who we truly are. There is power in being free to be who we have been created to be. Think about this please.

In reference to David Hudson and to the ORME, I think we can all see that it is not advisable for everyone. Certainly, the biggest issues are where it takes us , ready or not, spiritually. Mentally. As far as the words allegedly written here by Dr. Barry, I would like to point out to all of us, that certainly we know very well that there would be a certain group or more very very motivated to shut up any discussions about a product with the potentials this one does. ESPECially, by a doctor. You would be very wise to think about that before allowing any more recent alleged written messages to influence you, as clearly, it would not be very intelligent to resist them, or advocate the use of a product , that common sense tells you would truly not be allowed by the powers that be. This is my humble opinion once again, and clearly I am sure not one some would agree with me on. Still for those that fully grasp the possibilities and secondly fully grasp the elitest mentality and goals, this should have already occurred in your minds eye. If it has not, you likely needed this to convict you on sharpening those senses. ? YES?

I will point out that David Hudson was reported to have suffered a serious heart attack after suffering tremendous loss in what he deemed sabotage of he personal efforts to bring ORME to us and to the world. When I think about this, I can almost assuredly believe he met with sabotage, however, considering the very product he was making, does it make sense to you that he suffered a heart attack? Just a thought I had fleetingly. He is rumored to live very close to me in Laveen, perhaps I will ring him on the tele. I don't know if I would even want to get involved with it to be honest. A man like that, a good, descent, giving man like he was, perhaps over zealous here and there, but his heart always in the right place, if he has for whatever reason, made the decision to end the pursuit of this product, knowing the weight and lives involved, then I for one am smart enough to consider that he knows best. Perhaps now is not the time for the rebirth of this amazing product, except for those very few among us that are able to survive the experiece in the first place. Those who seek , can find it.

I thank you all for this wonderful exchange of conversation and for your honest abilities to look closer at human nature. You have truly blessed my life and for that I thank you.
User avatar
Angel
Brandmeister
Brandmeister
 
Posts: 269
Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2009 11:26 pm

Re: What became of David Hudson

Postby Kompilieren on Mon May 25, 2009 11:46 pm

Hello Angel,
While I tend to agree with you on most cases, because you are a very insightful person, there is one aspect I perhaps do not fully agree and I think that is perhaps a discussion you intended to invoke here in the forums for everyone.
Human nature is a debate, there are people who do not see humans as anything more than just advanced animals that evolved opposable thumbs and from there on took off down a new evolutionary track. That being said, it still stands to reason that within us lies the animal/mammal. Then there are those more of a religious doctrine who believe we were created by God(s) with purpose and reason. I am not saying that these are the only two ideologies just giving a few examples. History should always be looked out through a broad scope of religions, sciences, and philosophies to reflect progress and evolution of humans; that is knowledge and the spiritual, worldly, material, and self intellect advancement (or in our current status I suppose some could say decline or reccession). People were too quick to cast off the church/religions/government/education etc.that we have become unanchored and adrift in a meaningless sea of despair as we search with frantic hands to find meaning. I do agree with you whole heartedly that those aspects mention (church/government etc) are causing restriction in the growth of humans, whether or not there is a conspiracy surrounding the oppression is another matter.

These substances were given as right of passages, and were once considered a very important aspect of the journey of life, now people take them as a formal convention as one looks for purpose or as a result of lack of purpose in one's life. I believe this is directly connected to societies disconnectedness with truth, which has been occuring since books were first being written and composed and although I am not much of a gambler I wager long before then as well. Again, one ought to seek the answer to the whys and whats of one's actions, why do they seek the truth, why are they taking substances, what do they hope to gain, and the biggy are they ready to listen? Boredom should never be a justifyable answer to any of these questions either. If one has no answers but only hopes to acquire them then I suggest therapy of sorts (not necessarily saying go see a therapist but engage in therapuetic activities) as opposed to any mind altering substances. If we are not self aware, it is difficult to then be aware.

I do not have a natural desire to kill, and at one point I believed 100% it was circumstance and conditioning that led people to kill. My sister also shared a similar belief and trained to be a psycologist for inmates. She gave up quickly, saying that there are some, who have had an otherwise normal loving life with no abuse, given opportunities of advancement that others dream, and yet, still desire to kill or hurt others for the pleasure it brings. She could not assess if this was some form of social conditioning at play but was quickly losing her faith in life and has since become a dental hygenist. What I have witnessed from pure observation is that when a child/adult gets hurt, they hurt back almost as an immediate response. (I am not saying ALL people do this). I do not know if that is human or animal to desire such vindication at a young age, and worse adult stage of life, but in my personal opinion for whatever it is worth to anyone, through advancement of our intellect and moral development we gain a wisdom to not hurt back, a deeper satisfying gratfication to love rather than hurt. This would then coincide with the idea that we are in a dimension with veils of forgettfulness and through means we gain insight, remember, or awaken. It is not so much as supression of an internal part of ourselves(i.e. animal) that desires to hurt/kill but the wisdom of the knowledge we acquire through our expereinces and education. Even in nature, when an animal is not in a situation to kill to survive in that then it would react with all means necessary to kill to survive it will not imediately react with hostility toward another but curiosity and only what i can describe as patience. There are numerous youtube videos showing what people normally say as 'mortal enemies' sharing some amazing heart warming moments, but of course, I never did see what became of the small furry creature later. Anyhow, this experience of life, remembering, is sentsitive; and as such we are all very impressionable. Our ignorant actions throughout the expansion of intellectual awakening is represented as the reaction of the 'ego' towards the universe, self, and others as a mutual beneficial relationship. When we see this, learn that it is not all for one as in one for ourself but more so that by helping ohers we truly do help ourselves---(insert love/teach here if you prefer that verbage better). When we first teach ourselves to swim we can then teach others. That means we are learning and teaching and have a better chance for survival than if we went at it alone. Just think at the astonishing feats our little ant friends accomplish alone and then look even more so what they accomplish working in conjuction together as one society with one coinciding plan of action. They do not lose their indiviudal selves, but find the meaning to themselves.

Thank you for the spin Angel. I agree that people are in need, and have a rising desire, of constantly looking at what it means to be a human being. There are some veils imposed upon us, and others a naturally occuring process of life, it is the imposed veils that make me a bit rabid.

~K~
Kompilieren
Hesperian
Hesperian
 
Posts: 82
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 8:46 pm

Re: What became of David Hudson

Postby Angel on Tue May 26, 2009 2:23 pm

My dear friend I really think that we do not disagree as much as you think and in fact is merely in the ways we look at the role of human nature that we seem to be on opposite ends.

If I may approach it with your own words here..
What I have witnessed from pure observation is that when a child/adult gets hurt, they hurt back almost as an immediate response. (I am not saying ALL people do this). I do not know if that is human or animal to desire such vindication at a young age, and worse adult stage of life, but in my personal opinion for whatever it is worth to anyone, through advancement of our intellect and moral development we gain a wisdom to not hurt back, a deeper satisfying gratification to love rather than hurt.


Remember once I told you how much value there is in observation, and indeed so very important for us to do. In this observation you are able to see that even as a child we are learning to experience with our emotions. This child has a natural instinct to hurt when they have been hurt. This is a far cry from a natural instinct to kill. Indeed not even in the same set of factors. Furthermore , a child learns by doing this that the satisfaction in hurting is quite empty and does not serve to aid his hurt to any degree and if it is emotionally able to make him feel better, as he grows and experiences understandings and experiences he will eventually grow up/evolve to the point where he will see that hurting others or lashing out does not make him feel better and only makes him feel worse. The child would not have created or chosen to hurt the other, unless he had been hurt and even when a child does hurt others, this too is a learning experience and quite natural.

In reference to the people your sister met , I too have been faced with the reality that some people seem to be born with hate in them and do seem to enjoy watching others suffer. The key here is seem. We do not know that these individuals are truly human for example, lol, but we will assume that they are. lol . In that case how do we know that they have not been traumatized by some event or food source, chemical compound etc. Things of many places, times, and even instruments of varied and numerous amounts could have been the cause of the changes taken place within these people. Perhaps they are merely used and incarnated to serve as only catalyst in the lives of others. These people are few and the numbers comparative in the grand number of humans negligible. To know human nature is merely to look at self. If you are human , you know what is and is not a natural state by looking at self. Looking outward at others in 99 of 100 cases will only serve to agree with your assessment. Perhaps 99 is a bit high but I still try to give a positive slant here lol.

We are here to learn from experiences .. to experience, to live without the comfort of a veil removed , so that we have a will to survive. The will to survive is a natural condition of this life, this should not be mistaken as survival of the fittest or compared to a person hell bent on the destruction and pain of others. It is simply not natural in humans. One of the great minds studied at length the mind of the sociopath. In the case of these people, there would an observed and demonstrated total lack of regard for any of the people around them. These people appear to have no conscious responsibility to others and no regrets in themselves for hurting anyone. A monster some would say. The most interesting thing about this study though is that these people literally have no emotional empathy whatsoever. Not that they lack an understanding of other emotions , simply that they do not have any empathy at all. I myself can not imagine life without empathy, indeed it would seem to be one of utter heartlessness. This is in a very few people, and the key to treating them, as they do not always, all, have to be a danger to society, although most of them are, but the key is to show them that it will serve them better if they were smarter in their approach to get what they want by simply acknowledging they do not have empathy, but most people do. They see that the smart way to gain what it is that they want is to work in the learned components of what empathy causes others to do, think and feel. So that they do not jeopardize obtaining what they want by hurting those with empathy. In other words, they must understand that they lack all portions of empathy, which means they will never have it. However, and what makes them so dangerous is that because they have none they can not know without being taught what it is and can not begin to understand how it will affect others or themselves. Once they learn what it is they lack and how it affects others, they stand a chance to at least be in society and even become a good part of it, by learning the characteristics of the emotion they lack. It goes back to the infringement on free will. For the sociopath it is better FOR THEM, smarter, to act in the knowledge of empathy, then to continue in ignorance, not because they care, lol , but because the odds that they can get what they want are greatly increased by doing so. It was astounding to the fellow who studied this and he was convinced of the success of this type of treatment. When asked if he would be comfy if all of them were placed into society that he studied, he was horrified at the thought. However, at the same time he was very clear that not every sociopath belonged in prison or mental hospitals either.

Sorry about the rabbit chase but I loved learning about that study and it seemed to fit in here if only to say, these people may be human and may not be (they have the same lack of emotion that the Orions or Greys (e.t. ) have been reported to show. The point though is that even if they are and I am sure they are , they are functioning without all abilities of a human being for some reason. This does not mean that human nature is a nature lacking empathy. It simply means that some people are born F*%# up! There is a reason but that is also debatable where human nature in my opinion is not at all.

I guess it is safe to say, at this point and unless people here are able to show me that my opinion is incorrect, this will be and is far more than just an opinion. In fact, it is and has been the very key element of what I perceive to be as my personal life purpose and intend to go out and teach others in schools and universities and anywhere they invite me to speak that the key to changing the things we do not like, begins with first knowing what it is to be our self. That begins at the very basics of human nature, and certainly from there we must address the differences in genders and then to sexuality and finally the ability to accept all that we are without shame and guilt. This is when we must throw off the conditioning to become all we can be. I already do this on quite an enormous scale and have been blessed with an few unique gifts in expression and what some here call a golden tongue. lol Very erotic thought for me, although I realize it was not intended that way. still there it is none the less. hehe. Seriously though , it is what I do and truly it is of a great help to people , a great number of people, perhaps not as much a need in those as spiritually aware as we, but indeed a great many benefit from my insight. It is a great and powerful gift for someone to come around and give you freedom from years of guilt and shame, simply from hearing the truth and the power in the human condition. For the ones that are chained by religious conditioning, it has not all been bad for them, and I am the first to say so, yet knowing and understanding that when we act in any fashion to repress a human trait and feel shame to have it, that what we are actually doing is saying To God, he made us wrong or something along these ridiculous lines. It brings him and your creation dishonor. Have mercy! and if any book or organization or idea for that matter asks you to do such a thing, it is your best bet to run, not walk to your nearest exit! They are not holding your best interests nor do they have any reverence for God.

I want you to know that I don't find your opinion is wrong, I just don't find a very few key components used to create your opinion valid in the context of this particular topic. For example I am not against the idea of evolution, in fact it seems logical that we were perhaps created at some point in the past more closely related to the animal. However, to assume the story ends there or begins only there is very unlikely and indeed although mamals, we are not animals and therefore that part of the argument, although makes perfect sense and perfectly correct in the animal kingdom, does not belong in the make up of human nature, we are not animals. period.

Once we remove those elements in forming your opinion if you look at that , I think you will find we can agree on the elements of human nature. Hopefully, if anything can be certain in having these really great conversations in my mind , is how loud and clear the message is regarding the need we have to go back to square one. If we can not arrive at the same conclusions as intelligent reasonable people, I have no business teaching at all. If there is a chance I am wrong in my perception of human nature, I truly want to know that because, I surely would parish in my mind body and soul to imagine I might have thrown someone off with bullshit that hinders them along their journey.

I am very confident that I have done my homework and taken the time to peel each and every layer of conditioning, and see now who I am simply as a human female and in addition to that and to my own humility and sheer shock was forever changed when I learned what it is to be a human male. I could never imagine to put a price down for the education I received in those years, truly I value it more than a degree at any university in this world. It has been a priceless gift and one I intend to show as many who are willing to listen. What I have to offer people is truly life altering and on the positive side of it all. I am lucky to understand and to have been blessed with it and I am humble too. however, I speak with authority, because I have earned the respect and knowledge to be an authority, on this particular topic. When it comes down to human nature and who we are as a species, what makes us tick, why we do things and even in anticipating what we will do next, I won't be so bold to say I know better than any other, but I am confident I can stand among the most qualified. This as you know does not mean I am perfect or that I do not make mistakes in judgment or in my own life. In truth I make more than my fair share. I am never so arrogant that you can not show me a mistake , just be ready to argue the point meticulously . hehe. I love that you do this with me K and look forward to any new additions. You too ozziegem. Thanks very much for the opportunity to share with you.
User avatar
Angel
Brandmeister
Brandmeister
 
Posts: 269
Joined: Mon Mar 09, 2009 11:26 pm

Re: What became of David Hudson

Postby Kompilieren on Wed May 27, 2009 2:22 am

Since it seems for now it is only us up for the debate I will debate with you my sweet friend.

I agree our perspectives appear to run the same course. One can only know from futher observation no? I however did say that human nature is debatable as people have often and still do use science, religion, spirituality and such to support and even create one's philosophies. The majority being science and religion but not limited to only those. I gave examples that I myself come across most often and chose to voice them as I thought if we are engaging ourselves in the task for debating or shall I boldy say defining the 'basics' or 'foundation' of human nature then someone ought to voice those principals.

I believe a miscommunication arose and I thank you for clarifying that for any observers. I do so enjoy that golden tongue of yours. I was not intending that when one hurts they hurt back is equilivant to the natural instinct to kill. I was however attempting to link the aspect of hurt and hurting to extending out in how one projects thier actions and a doubel intention to link it to the animal kingdom. And I agree and believe metioned that a child (hopefully) given the right guidance, education and not programmed or otherwise brainwashed by common society 'values' will learn a deeper satisfation when through thier own personal experience learn that vindication, retaliation, etc truly have little to no value in growth of one's life. This of course could then extend to adults as they may not learn this lesson for quite some time as a result of factors ranging from child abuse, neglect, influence, conditioning etc. I agree that the majority of humans if given the circumstance to kill or be killed, would then kill, even then DocPtah had mentioned in the forum of paradigm on education that people had diffculty killing others during war and were shooting pretty much what one could say as randomly but with intention to hinder/scare the opponent. Recently, a person close to me has found themselves in a bit of a pickle as they believed they were being burgarlized and shot the perpetrator only to find it was a bligerate idiot he calls a friend. Events transpired and I found myself curious for further information so I sat on a police community meeting where they said that the majority of home owners die from thier own weapons that a perp uses against them. I was curious to this 'fact' and when asked why that was the officer told me it was because the home owner would generally warn the intruder they had a weapon, and either not use it or shoot to cause the least wound with intent to stop. I did not see any reports to delcare this as fact and wonder exactly how if the home owner was deceased they would know that the home owner warned the intruder..but seeing how my questions were about to get me removed I held off on that one.


I too have been faced with the reality that some people seem to be born with hate in them and do seem to enjoy watching others suffer.


HAHA ha I agree the key is seem and I do not brave the places she (my sister) has traveled too much yet but braved some other ventures and found little hurt scared egos deep and burried that have lashed out in the cruelest and brutal ways. I prefer to live in my make shift shack I call reality and beleive that true evil does not exist...it is a preference not that i do not already possess a form of knowledge that some people are born, for whatever reason perhaps karma or to assist us in learning what ever, f$%#@D, excuse the eluding to profanity as I do not quite think mental or insane would even breach the description these types of 'people.' I sometimes wonder about the depths of myself when I think, how I project my pity on them as they must not be experiencing the joy of life as i do. And then i think, well I am not experiencing the joy of life like they do...and I hesitate to say joy here in relation to 'evil' as I do not have any idea what so ever what individuals of this caliber are experiencing. I prefer for now, like you to assume and I thank those who do have to deal with this on a daily basis and allow me to live in my make-shift shack and keep the big bad wolves at bay. In regards to a sociopath... I do believe that if one had no empathy they probably woud not continue with thier pathologic tendencies. Empathy swings both ways... we can expereince to a degree what one must be feeling physically, emotionally, and mentally most of us then wish to aid or sympatheize with this individual others... it is like nourishment. This empathy they use to fuel their life and chose these types of people as thier 'targets.' I do not see any reason why any organism would waste any energy on an activity that did not provide something to them in return i.e. self-gratification. Helping others brings us happiness, or for those more sick and twisted I suppose that would be what you perceive as the Orion or Greys, destruction (applied liberally here) would be their gratification.

I agree with your assessment that the key to change is first knowing what is it to be ourselves. That however applies to a multitude of levels as we are dimensional beings...in that we have depth. Now, I do beleive if we observe our little animals friends we will find that we are not so different from them in some regards but we have evolved in others and if we are discussing the basics of human nature and are then assuming your stance as that there is no foundation for the animal train of thought as we then intend to move to a higher evolutionary train and then that would mean we are not looking at the foundation but some predissor there of... and address the difference in sexuality which would be a far branch from gender differences as those then can be applied to a more base level. So if I am understanding your intentions correctly you are indeed saying that we not go back so far as mammal lineage (and when I say animal i use it to describe the observation of common tendancies one could then apply it to insects for that matter as Ozgem already has in other forums, I do not nor do many other scientists limit it when they say animal but the term gets lost in translation and often only thought of in respect to the animal kingdom) but more so as we evovled into humans and evolved our sexuality aspect. This reminds me of a recent archeaological find, well recent in that they finally revealed it to the public in that the a very old Venus Figurine was recovered dating further back than any figurine carved... even animal. The person giving an interview said, "It was very sexually charged." Now, of course this is open for debate what the figurine represents and i am not saying we should debate it here as there is a forum already in discussion and a better location I only bring up the figurine in relation to our divergence of the evolutionary train. "However, to assume the story ends there or begins only there is very unlikely" again that would be an assumption that has been badly protrayed and I did not aide in the correction of that portrayal in the previous forum. Shame on me. But further to say that "although mamals, we are not animals and therefore that part of the argument, although makes perfect sense and in the animal kingdom, does not belong in the make up of human nature, we are not animals." I was not intending that we are only animals nor should one look at the humans in that matter,as I stated we have depth, but if one did they would find a broader perspective than probably thought if they observed nature and if they could not readily do so you-tube is an available tool. That it will show that even in nature just because something can kill and has/does kill especially when it comes to food source does not mean they do. Observation. But then this statement my dear friend would go against the belief that we are one.. if we do not see ourselves as extension in our surrounding we then limit ourselves and if as you say the key is first knowing ourselves that is a knowing that has much depth and can begin at any point and still result with us balancing who we are as a society (whole), culture, gender, and of course as individuals would this then not be a predication for our animal kingdom, mammalia class? But as I understand your intentions you are directing the debate toward the expansion/evolution/ and or incorporation of the sexuality aspect of human nature.


Wikipedia:
Animal sexual behaviour takes many different forms, even within the same species. Researchers have observed monogamy, promiscuity, sex between species, sexual arousal from objects or places, sex apparently via duress or coercion, copulation with dead animals, homosexual, heterosexual and bisexual sexual behaviour, and situational sexual behaviour and a range of other practices among animals other than humans. Related studies have noted diversity in sexed bodies and gendered behaviour, such as intersex and transgender animals.

The study of animal sexuality (and primate sexuality especially) is a rapidly developing field. It used to be believed that only humans and a handful of species performed sexual acts other than for procreation, and that animals' sexuality was instinctive and a simple response to the "right" stimulation (sight, scent). Current understanding is that many species that were formerly believed monogamous have now been proven to be promiscuous or opportunistic in nature; a wide range of species appear both to masturbate and to use objects as tools to help them do so; in many species animals try to give and get sexual stimulation with others where procreation is not the aim; and homosexual behaviour has now been observed among 1,500 species and in 500 of those it is well documented.


And then....also from wikipedia...
Human sexuality is how people experience and express themselves as sexual beings.[1] Human sexuality has many aspects. Biologically, sexuality refers to the reproductive mechanism as well as the basic biological drive that exists in all species and can encompass sexual intercourse and sexual contact in all its forms. There are also emotional or physical aspect of sexuality, which refers to the bond that exists between individuals, which may be expressed through profound feelings or emotions, and which may be manifested in physical or medical concerns about the physiological or even psychological aspects of sexual behaviour. Sociologically, it can cover the cultural, political, and legal aspects; and philosophically, it can span the moral, ethical, theological, spiritual or religious aspects.

Recent studies on human sexuality have highlighted that sexual aspects are of major importance in building up personal identity and to social evolution of individuals


Yes i chopped that quote out that said animals only engage in sexuality in sterotypical conducts because I am trying to get us to expand our minds outside of stereotypical hugabaloo if we are trying to get others to do the same then so shall we. To teach is to learn no?

If one looks here they will find a wide range of species that eganges in sexuality outside of sterotypical beliefs...horses, lions, hyenas, dolphins, sheep, seahorses, flatworms, birds lizards.. and this is only limiting the search to wikipedia which did give references to studies if one desires to look at the studies themselves.

So if we direct the intention of sexuality outside of the sterotype found common in the populas we will see we have much more in common in the animal kingdom when it comes to sexuality and of course I do believe you wanted people to see that in the first place. (I mean the part of expanding our minds outside of sterotypical prinicpals). Which in that case... sexuality has been stripped from us as people only see us as 'animals' in a common reference and not much more then some popular belief that animals have no depth to them either (and again I suggest to those people to watch the discovery channel, you-tube or go outside and interact take a dang saffari but form an opinion of thier own) or then as some form of special creation by God(s) so then we live in sin to engage in masturbation and our fornication outside of marriage and worse if we did we would then be no more than a savage animal who engages and fullfills their sexual impulses! This has then been discussed as women would be whores to sleep with multiple partners but not men. Several discussions on this topic and the beauty and art of sexuality is removed as people conclude we are sowing oats and or reproducing to pass on the genes. Not saying some people aren't doing it for this reason but not all people. I do believe these limited types of thinking are results of years of miscommunicated concepts mixed with conditioning and has indeed dishonored the human race whether we evloved from sludge to primates to hominids or created from clay and or any other material... we are sexual beings no matter where that foundation is rooted.. the fact remains it is apart of who we are and that part is being suppressed, oppressed and neglected worse still if fullfilled we feel shame and disgust for it.

It is a great and powerful gift for someone to come around and give you freedom from years of guilt and shame, simply from hearing the truth and the power in the human condition.


Insightful thank you Angel.


Thank you all for reading my ramblings,
~K~
Kompilieren
Hesperian
Hesperian
 
Posts: 82
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 8:46 pm

Re: What became of David Hudson

Postby Kompilieren on Wed May 27, 2009 2:24 am

By the way I do believe we ought to move this to its own forum... don''t you think it deserves its own name? Or are we too shameful and bashful as adults to discuss such topics openly in its own forum? Just a thought.
Kompilieren
Hesperian
Hesperian
 
Posts: 82
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 8:46 pm

Re: What became of David Hudson

Postby ozziegem on Thu May 28, 2009 4:59 am

Flying through the Halls ...into forums ..found a Broom that flits..

I say WHY NOt ? Its A Fact ..does that make it a Truth..?

Cheers All .
Gem
ozziegem
Brandmeister
Brandmeister
 
Posts: 208
Joined: Thu Mar 26, 2009 3:22 am

Re: What became of David Hudson

Postby Dorman1 on Thu May 28, 2009 10:17 pm

This has then been discussed as women would be whores to sleep with multiple partners but not men. Several discussions on this topic and the beauty and art of sexuality is removed as people conclude we are sowing oats and or reproducing to pass on the genes. Not saying some people aren't doing it for this reason but not all people. I do believe these limited types of thinking are results of years of miscommunicated concepts mixed with conditioning and has indeed dishonored the human race whether we evloved from sludge to primates to hominids or created from clay and or any other material... we are sexual beings no matter where that foundation is rooted.. the fact remains it is apart of who we are and that part is being suppressed, oppressed and neglected worse still if fullfilled we feel shame and disgust for it.


I suppose everyone gives this topic thought, and it is upon how many levels of thought the topic is approached that varies. I remember reading once, that hunters expressed reverence and gratitude to the animal they hunted, as acknowledgement for the life giving sustenance provided by the animal they killed and Mother Earth for providing. If we are to focus higher upon sexual interactions than mere instinct, and mere human physical desire, I can only mention the reverence given between two humans as acknowledgement of taking or perhaps more politely stated as the receiving of pleasure. Some may claim they only give, but this is dubious as receiving occurrs by both. In Theosophy, it is only mentioned in the context of it being engaged within Tantric rituals, and that this was never the original form for Tantric Rites. In otherwords, they do not believe it is the norm to be engaging sex within Tantra. I'm not sure what is asserted concerning modern attitudes other than the observance that attraction can often be binding oneself to a sensuality. If an individual does not have any pressing need for allotment of their time for more sublimated or aspiring activities, and want to devote a considerable amount of their thoughts and/or activities upon this subject, I would assert that it is possible activities become engaged upon which infringe upon the liberties of another. Or even if this never occurs, one simply devotes much time in the day of his/her life toward thoughts of this and then there are the very likely emanations of unfulfilled desires. Thoughts and desires are energies that do not simply disperse or incur dissolusion, they are drawn toward similar energies, they accrue within the Kama Loka, or the place in which the deseased has temporary abode as long as it may be until Earthly attractions finally work their way out. Then the second death occurs and the human individual moves on toward the higher blissful state in between death and rebirth. Non physical life is at least as long as physical life in duration, but only receives attention in the form of dogmatic postulations, or new age idea's. So it is really not given much thought, and as a result of this, people either possess the dogmatic descriptions which are not very easily swallowed anymore, resulting in the belief by many that the death of the physical body is followed by nothing. They only see man-made laws to follow and acquire often, the sophistic idea of living. Some consider a single person uninvolved in marriage, avoiding the battle, because that is just how it may be described. For some reason however, this brings on the assumption that the single person is to engage in sublime or aspiring pursuits toward the divine. I think I just touched upon attraction and subsequent bars for a prison which may occur; a little tiny bit of the subject concerning the Doctrine of Reimbodiment; forgettint to mention karma which is collateral teachings to reimbodiment; and being married with children or devoting a bit more time toward quicker evolutive aspirations.
User avatar
Dorman1
Door Man One
Door Man One
 
Posts: 569
Joined: Mon Nov 24, 2008 10:45 pm

Re: What became of David Hudson

Postby Kompilieren on Thu May 28, 2009 11:27 pm

Ahhh my sweet Dorman I am delighted someone else has joined us. I began a new topic under this forum for this thread.

That statement being found toward the later end of my rather lengthy rambling was more of a thought in passing I mentioned but not so much with full intentions of it having any substantial matter to me as in the sophisticated ideas of living hardly mean much to me, I suppose that would make me dangerous to those that do as I am then a symbol for change as I play outside that catbox, but more so to connect topics together. In that I knew it pertained to the subject matter and has been and still is an issue in society. It was more to lead people to focus on higher aspects of sexual interactions and I do like how you do just that. You have an eloquent art to you Dorman and I do enjoy reading you sharing your thoughts.

I have re-read your posting and keep focusing on a few lines which intentions have been popping up all over the place these days and I believe this is in part what has lead so many people astray and lost from who we are and not being able to distinguish ourselves as we are lost to the defintion of human.

Dorman1 Wrote:
Non physical life is at least as long as physical life in duration, but only receives attention in the form of dogmatic postulations, or new age idea's. So it is really not given much thought, and as a result of this, people either possess the dogmatic descriptions which are not very easily swallowed anymore, resulting in the belief by many that the death of the physical body is followed by nothing. They only see man-made laws to follow and acquire often, the sophistic idea of living. Some consider a single person uninvolved in marriage, avoiding the battle, because that is just how it may be described. For some reason however, this brings on the assumption that the single person is to engage in sublime or aspiring pursuits toward the divine. I think I just touched upon attraction and subsequent bars for a prison which may occur;


It feels as if the personal aspects of people are lost and we are more like zombies, and even hollowed in some respects. This greatly saddens me to my very core, especially when it comes to marraige and relationships of any sorts whether platonic or sensual or otherwise. Anyhow, if you could be so kind as to assist me with directing the layers and depth of this topic to that other forum for future discussions I would appreciate it.

Thank you
~K~
Kompilieren
Hesperian
Hesperian
 
Posts: 82
Joined: Fri Apr 24, 2009 8:46 pm

Re: What became of David Hudson

Postby truthseeker on Thu Nov 19, 2009 8:13 am

I have found an article in the phoenix news http://www.phoenixnewtimes.com/1996-09- ... ly-panacea this article show that at least one doctor has administered ORMEs to a dying aids patient. the ORMEs were made on hudsons farm. please read the whole article as there are multiple opinions of hudson.
truthseeker
Sprite
Sprite
 
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu Nov 19, 2009 8:00 am

Re: What became of David Hudson

Postby nexuslink20 on Mon Jan 25, 2010 3:38 pm

Out of curiosity, at the end of David hudson´s article about white powder gold he states the following,
"There are many people in this world that don’t want this to happen. But this is the New World Order, just not the one George Bush saw. It can be scary. But it is here. Every piece is now known to Science. The philosophical implications are immense."

Can anybody elaborate a little more on this? Are there different illuminati member´s that have their own vision of the new world order, what is david Hudson´s?

Thanks.
nexuslink20
Sprite
Sprite
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Jan 25, 2010 3:26 pm

Previous

Return to Human Society and Interaction

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest