Quote:
Originally Posted by Rose of Cairo  Again, you're believing that a "restricted" diet is not as good as one allowing you to eat whatever you want. For you not eating everything is a loss. This is a belief of yours that you could change.
For example for me, eating raw is not "restrictive". Raw food is for me truly living, alive, energetical, high quality food. What do I need more? So when you ask why on Earth I choose not to eat hamburgers, it's like me asking you why on Earth you don't want to eat toilet paper. Why do you choose such a restricted diet?? |
Well, I don't know anyone who eats toilet paper, so that isn't much of a restriction for me.
But I don't eat meat, and although I can say to people that it's not restrictive for me personally, by definition it is restrictive. It shuts out options. In fact, it shuts out many options. I don't miss these options anymore and life as a non-meat-eater has become much easier over the years with more people cutting back on meat and more choices offered, but it still is by definition restrictive.
I figure you feel about the raw food lifestyle the way I feel about a vegetarian lifestyle -- it's become part of who I
am, and I like it this way. I didn't quit eating meat because of health reasons, though -- it was because since I was in grade school I felt uncomfortable about eating animals. I've gone through that journey so long now that I don't even feel like I want to get involved in discussions like the one jeff3 mentioned in the other forum. Sometimes I think I'd be benefitting animals more if I started eating meat and only purchased from free-range organic farmers, but that's a whole 'nother thing I'm not ready to start considering seriously.
So, really, my question is -- with LoA and subjective reality and IM, a person could, in theory, decide that whatever diet they prefer is the healthiest one and do just fine with it, as long as they can change their belief system -- correct?