Roe v. Wade: Matching Energy
Topics:
“Roe v. Wade: Matching Energy”
“A Decade of Leaders That Are Not Leading”
Wednesday, June 29, 2022 (Private/Phone)
Participants: Mary (Michael) and Lynda (Ruther)
(Audio begins partway through session)
LYNDA: As you may be aware, the Supreme Court has overturned Roe versus Wade, which is a woman’s right to have an abortion, and in several states of the country, women are not going to be allowed to have abortions. My impression of this whole thing is that it’s a step towards creating more division. It’s a step that is inciting a lot of people to have a lot of opinions, and both opinions are very strong. And I feel like it’s what you said about more polarizing will come from this, which is just a damn shame.
And I do have opinions about it, but I’m wanting to keep an open mind and an open heart, because there are people that are, for example, pro-choice but against abortion, meaning a woman can choose to have an abortion but they would never do that. That’s not their solution; they would do something else, unless it was an intense medical thing and was a harm to the mother and the child, or… and whatever.
I just feel like it’s… There’s a lot going on here in town, and women are striking and very upset. I guess my thing is, I’d like to find a way to support my belief or opinion but not match energy. I want to be a part of the solution.
But I think my question to you is, what’s the collective going to do with this one in the United States of America? What direction… or is it too soon to tell? What’s happening as a result of this?
ELIAS: You already know the answer to that one.
LYNDA: Civil war is a possibility, is the answer to that.
ELIAS: Not necessarily. You know the answer, meaning you can see with your own eyes what is happening. Other than that, it’s a crystal ball question.
LYNDA: Okay.
ELIAS: I can’t tell you what’s going to happen. That depends on all of you. I can tell you that yes, it’s not creating more polarization. You’ve already been polarized, especially in that subject. There are certain subjects that your country has always been polarized about, and it’s not that they’re more polarized now, it’s simply that you’re being more vocal about it.
And what I mean by that is because people have always been vocal about their differences in relation to this particular subject – that’s not new either – but now people are being vocal about it in (pause) a different capacity, in which the people that have been in opposition to the subject of abortion have always been vocal. They’re always been expressing their disagreement with that subject. Now what is different is that the people that are in favor of the subject of abortion are being just as vocal and just as hateful.
LYNDA: Right.
ELIAS: Therefore, there is a lot of matching energy that is occurring, because the people that are in agreement with the idea and the right to HAVE an abortion are now angry also and are expressing in a similar manner to what the people that were AGAINST the subject of abortion have always been.
The situation of the polarization in many subjects is not that the polarization is more, or that people are more divided than they have been – they’ve been divided for quite some time. It’s simply that you’re moving into a time framework now in which all the people are being much more vocal about it and much more venomous about it, and in that, there is much more matching energy than there was before. It’s not that they’re more polarized than they were before but that they’re more vocal about it and they’re more angry about it than they have been before.
Therefore it remains to be seen what you do with all of that. And the idea of civil war is something that is not unreasonable to think about or is something that is definitely a potential. That doesn’t mean it will happen, but it could happen. It’s definitely a situation in which your country is ripe for that, but it depends on what you do. It depends on what direction you move in.
I would say that depending upon your perception of the idea of something such as civil war, it could be viewed as fortunately or unfortunately, your leaders of your country in the most recent time frameworks – I would say in your most recent decade – have been weak. You haven’t presented yourselves with leaders that move in a direction of inspiring people or moving in a direction in which they are (pause) actually engaged with the people and listening to the people.
You’ve chosen leaders that are not leading. And THAT, dependent upon how you observe that or what your perception is, you could look at that as unfortunate or you could look at it as fortunate. Having leaders that are not leading, for people that believe in the ideal of less involvement with government, that is something that they would view as good. For people that have the perception that government should be more involved with the people, then they would see it as unfortunate.
LYNDA: Interesting.
ELIAS: But it’s genuinely a matter of perception and the differences in perception, and the direction that people move in, in relation to those perceptions. But there is a lot of matching energy that is occurring.
LYNDA: All righty then. Well, thank you.
ELIAS: You are welcome.
Copyright 2022 Mary Ennis, All Rights Reserved.