posted October 24, 2008 12:25 AM            

As in numerology, Linda would emphasize that if, say, a person has or had mutiple names or titles, then the most frequently used ones are the ones to be taken more into consideration while calculating their numerological values. I personally think the same can be applied to lexigrams. ABORTION/ABORTIONS has long been a heated debate here at LL (if memory serves), and unlike in Linda's earlier work "Love Signs", in which she expressed her staunch opposition to abortion, in her later book "Star Signs", she simply explained that due to the fact there are more than simply one single abortion on the planet, but many, many of those, therefore she chose to lexigram the word's plural form ABORTIONS, and got results such as IT IS NOT A SIN, IT IS A ROBOT, IT IS NOT BORN, IT IS TORN etc.

However, I've been thinking about this particular issue on and off for a long period of time and my personal opinion is: the most constantly spoken term of the word is the singular form ABORTION, rather than its plural form ABORTIONS; when we talk, we often might say things like: "ABORTION is illegal", "I am against ABORTION", "ABORTION is necessary when the pregnancy may endanger the mother's health", "ABORTION can cause complications" etc. We rarely say ABORTIONS, because we seldomly talk about ABORTIONS as incidents, as medical cases, but we much more often mention the topic with the singular form ABORTION as a concept, as an action taken by a person. We talk about the legality of ABORTION as the action taken, we speak of our personal beliefs regarding ABORTION as the action taken, not as multiple incidents. Thus I personally think we should use ABORTION when lexigramming, instead of the recommended plural form ABORTIONS in Linda's "Star Signs". The same can be applied to other similar cases: I'd say "I don't like psychiatric hospitalization" as the action taken by individuals rather than "I don't like psychiatric hospitalizations" as separate incidents.

ABORTION

"IT IS NOT A SIN" cannot be found in its lexigram. Neither can "IT IS A ROBOT".

Regarding the pros and cons of ABORTION, you might not find the answer you want, but there's an excellent book that spends a chapter upon this issue that I highly recommend: "Entity Possession" by Samuel Sagan, M.D. , and visit his website at clairvision.org

I am not indicating ABORTION is a sin, as I am not as judgmental as I used to be anymore, but I just mean I am not saying there is absolutely nothing wrong with ABORTION, either.

posted October 24, 2008 01:45 AM            

ABORTION,
A TABOO OR NOT?
ABORT ABORT IT!
BOOT IT!
OBTAIN AN OBIT TOO..
OR NOT?
TO ABORT OR NOT TO ABORT?
BAR ABORTION?
BAN ABORTION?
NO BAR OR BAN ON ABORTION.
RIOT, RANT ON ABORTION!
OBTAIN AN ABORTION TO ABORT
A BRAT OR BAIRN NOT BORN.
OR A ROBOT?
OR NOT?
RANT ON AT IT...
A TABOO OR NOT?
ABORTION A BOON?
OR NOT A BOON?

bairn=child

posted October 28, 2008 07:46 AM            

quote:

---

Thanks for your insightful lexis, LEXX! You're amazing!

D

---

quote:

---

Even though occasionally people might speak things like "She's had three abortions" or things like that, but that's much more rare than the term "abortion" being mentioned in conversations. Hence the singular term ABORTION bears a much stronger vibration than the plural term ABORTIONS.

D

---

posted October 28, 2008 10:53 PM            

I second you. It remains a matter for further meditation.

posted November 18, 2008 10:25 PM              

ROB NOT A TRIO (mind, body, soul)

Going to work on this some more! Just didn't have time.

posted November 19, 2008 10:34 PM              

ABORT NOT A ROBOT BORN TO A TRIO
NOT TABOO TO ABORT A ROBOT NOT BORN
A TRIO RAN A TRAIN INTO A BRAT
A TRAIN RAN INTO A ROBOT BORN TO A TRIO
I OBTAIN NO ORBIT
I, A ROBOT, OBTAIN A TORN ORBIT
ROB NOT A ROBOT IN ORBIT
A BIT OF TIN RAN INTO IT TO ABORT IT
A BRAT RAN A BIT OF TIN INTO IT TO ABORT IT

Now for another lexigram...

ARE ABORTIONS NATURAL?

ABORTIONS ARE A TORN TONE TO GO INTO EARS
NATURE OBTAINS A TORN ORBIT
A ROBOT IS SET INTO ORBIT, ABORTIONS TARE ITS ORBIT
ABORTIONS TARE AN ORBIT
AN ORBIT IS NOT SET INTO NATURE, AS IT IS TORN
TARE NOT A ROBOT'S ORBIT
A BIT OF TIN RAN INTO A ROBOT TO RETURN IT TO STAR ORBIT
SO IT STARTS TO BE REBORN
ABORTIONS ARE NOT TRUE TO NATURE
ABORTIONS TARE NATURE'S ORBIT
SATAN TARES NATURE'S AURA TO SNARE IT

That's all I have time for right now. I'll continue it later.
Please correct errors!

posted November 19, 2008 11:33 PM            

quote:

---

Please correct errors!

---

quote:

---

ABORTION

ABORT NOT A ROBOT BORN TO A TRIO
NOT TABOO TO ABORT A ROBOT NOT BORN
A TRIO RAN A TRAIN INTO A BRAT
A TRAIN RAN INTO A ROBOT BORN TO A TRIO
I OBTAIN NO ORBIT
I, A ROBOT, OBTAIN A TORN ORBIT
ROB NOT A ROBOT IN ORBIT
A BIT O(f) TIN RAN INTO IT TO ABORT IT
A BRAT RAN A BIT O(f)F TIN INTO IT TO ABORT IT

---

Replace the word "OF" with the archaic contraction O', which is the same as "OF"!

posted November 19, 2008 11:40 PM            

Here are the simple fixes!

1...Replace "O(f)" as before with the Archaic contraction O' which means "OF".

2...Replace the word "(g)O" with the word BORE as in:

quote:

---

bore 1
(bôr, br)
v. bored, bor·ing, bores
v.tr.
1. To make a hole in or through, with or as if with a drill.
2. To form (a tunnel, for example) by drilling, digging, or burrowing.

---

3...Replace the word START(s) with the words CAN START

ARE ABORTIONS NATURAL?

ABORTIONS ARE A TORN TONE TO (GO) INTO EARS
NATURE OBTAINS A TORN ORBIT
A ROBOT IS SET INTO ORBIT, ABORTIONS TARE ITS ORBIT
ABORTIONS TARE AN ORBIT
AN ORBIT IS NOT SET INTO NATURE, AS IT IS TORN
TARE NOT A ROBOT'S ORBIT
A BIT (OF) TIN RAN INTO A ROBOT TO RETURN IT TO STAR ORBIT
SO IT (STARTS) TO BE REBORN
ABORTIONS ARE NOT TRUE TO NATURE
ABORTIONS TARE NATURE'S ORBIT
SATAN TARES NATURE'S AURA TO SNARE IT

posted November 20, 2008 12:09 AM            

quote:

---

TARE NOT A ROBOT'S ORBIT

---

quote:

---

tare 1 (târ)
n.
1. Any of various weedy plants of the genus Vicia, especially the common vetch.
2. Any of several weedy plants that grow in grain fields.
3. tares An unwelcome or objectional element.
[Middle English.]
tare 2 (târ)
n.
1. The weight of a container or wrapper that is deducted from the gross weight to obtain net weight.
2. A deduction from gross weight made to allow for the weight of a container.
3. Chemistry A counterbalance, especially an empty vessel used to counterbalance the weight of a similar container.
tr.v. tared, tar·ing, tares
To determine or indicate the tare of, especially to weigh in order to find out the tare.

---

quote:

---

tear 1 (târ)
v. tore (tôr, tr), torn (tôrn, trn), tear·ing, tears
v.tr.
1. To pull apart or into pieces by force; rend.
2. To make (an opening) by ripping: tore a hole in my stocking.
3. To lacerate (the skin, for example).
4. To separate forcefully; wrench: tore the wrappings off the present.
5. To divide or disrupt: was torn between opposing choices; a country that was torn by strife.
v.intr.
1. To become torn.
2. To move with heedless speed; rush headlong.
n.
1. The act of tearing.
2. The result of tearing; a rip or rent.
3. A great rush; a hurry.
4. Slang A carousal; a spree.
Phrasal Verbs:
tear around Informal
1. To move about in excited, often angry haste.
2. To lead a wild life.
tear at
1. To pull at or attack violently: The dog tore at the meat.
2. To distress greatly: Their plight tore at his heart.
tear away
To remove (oneself, for example) unwillingly or reluctantly.
tear down
1. To demolish: tear down old tenements.
2. To take apart; disassemble: tear down an engine.
3. To vilify or denigrate.
tear into
To attack with great vigor or violence: tore into the food; tore into his opponent.
tear off Informal
To produce hurriedly and casually: tearing off article after news article.
tear up
1. To tear to pieces.
2. To make an opening in: tore up the sidewalk to add a drain.
Idiom:
tear (one's) hair
To be greatly upset or distressed.

---

posted November 20, 2008 10:31 AM              

Just the word "CAN" as in "CAN START" won't fit in, as the sentence doesn't have a 'C' in it. Funny how I noticed THAT error and not my own. Lol. But I could always say "SO IT IS REBORN". Truth always finds a way.

posted November 20, 2008 12:34 PM            

quote:

---

Just the word "CAN" as in "CAN START" won't fit in, as the sentence doesn't have a 'C' in it. Funny how I noticed THAT error and not my own. Lol. But I could always say "SO IT IS REBORN". Truth always finds a way.

---

quote:

---

"SO IT IS REBORN"

---

quote:

---

Yes, I did mean TEAR. Thanks for providing the simple fixes! I do not enjoy seeing errors in lexigramming, as it can place a meaning into the word that was never there! And seriously alter one's perception of it. Sometimes it can work for good, but it's tricky.

---

quote:

---

I still need a lot of practice, obviously.

---

posted November 20, 2008 03:18 PM            

quote:

---

I'm glad that you're not afraid to point out errors

---

posted November 20, 2008 06:04 PM              

WHERE DOES ABORTION TAKE US?

DOWN TO THE TORN ORBIT WITH NO END
AND WE ARE REBORN TO NO END
ABORTION IS NOT WHAT WE ARE TO DO
END ABORTION AND KNOW TRUTH!
TRUTH TEARS THE BONDS THAT BIND US ON EARTH
KNOW TRUTH AND DON'T TAKE THE ROAD TO DEATH

posted November 22, 2008 12:51 AM            

Thanks for making the corrections and your passionate participation!

Pumpkin Peace

Impressive!

I'm especially amazed at your last post.

posted November 22, 2008 10:14 AM            

However the word
"DONT"
needs to be done this way:
DON'T.
Normally a contraction cannot be used in strict Lexigramming;
but your Lexigrammed phase has the full version so you can use the contraction!
DON'T=DO NOT

quote:

---

Oops, sorry. No more 'miss' for LEXX

---

quote:

---

I know what you mean about pointing out errors. People think you're just out to get them, when all you're trying to do is clean up for them, so that they can be SURE they're right and you're doing it all at once to get over with all the disappointment they might have by coming upon the mistakes one by one, which would be a longer, more painful process.
That was my spew for today. Lol.

---

I want to make my motives even clearer.
I usually enjoy even the Lexigrams with errors.
However......
I desire to see if what is actually to be found within the word, name, phrase, date;
whatever "SOURCE" they are Lexigramming.
So I redo them when I get time.....
.to see if I can find a Lexigrammatically correct way of fixing the errors by substituting another word or phrase.
whilst still retaining the meaning they had attempted to convey.
If it cannot be fixed to become a true error free Lexigram, then the message is not true or to be found within the "source"
being Lexigrammed.
I appreciate it when folks point out my errors.
I can then fix them.
Errors slip in even for me from time to time.
Leaving the errors and being too stubborn or vain to fix them is ridiculous.
OK....this might upset some folks but I am really wanting to discuss Lexigramming.
I am tired of the fear of backlashings just because I (and others have too)
have dared to question certain ways and "things" of Lexigramming.

quote:

---

Apologies, but I do not believe in some of the advice of the so called word druids and ... I feel Linda was in communication with a few kind,
wanting to be helpful, yet were still fun loving trickster spirits.
The "ethers" are populated with such.
I have very good reasons for my views on that....not going into it at this time...
suffice it to say the revelations came during channeling and whilst in deep immersion trance state.

---

continued next post.....

posted November 22, 2008 10:15 AM            

quote:

---

Muses....druids....nixies....pixies....and so forth....
Beware....The ancients knew this.....
Myth tells us....there is always a catch,
a price to be paid....
To these clever tricksters.....
Those who wish to keep gnosis
in the realms of mystery because it "seems" more divine.
Those who ridicule logic,
and do not want us to think for oursELVES. Like Queen Maub;
they would lose their control over things, which they do
not want to see evolve, and mysteries they do not want solved.
Without mindless blind worship, such creatures cannot influence mankind
to suit their own agendas.
Such willful ones would desire to keep us in the Dark Ages.
Logic, Science,and Fact terrify such as them.
It would be funny if it were not so sad in some ways.
Also doesn't anyone other than me find these druds not very evolved nor ethical nor honest...and not very intelligent?
Folks claim here at LL that these WDs are naughty...mischievous...prone to lying and telling folks to add letters not found in the source they are Lexigramming...leading folks astray...giving them an excuse to not birth error free Lexigrams. Perhaps they did/do that because it was not yet the time to free the keys...reveal the mystery's answers.
Point....could it be that they do it intentionally to keep folks from unlocking mysteries in Lexigramming?
Are they intent upon keeping the keys from anyone who will not oppose them? By listening to them certain parts of the puzzle, the sacred and yes, logical key pieces are eliminated. I submit, the adding of letters and words not found in that which one is Lexigramming, the vowel restriction, and so forth...are tactics to keep the keys out of our hands. And so thusly...I do them with all vowels, I do them without adding letters not there to be found...I do them without Letter limits. I have the letters, I use them. I do not have certain ones, then I do not add them. Those druids did not reveal the secrets and keys to Linda I feel because it was not her destiny to reveal them. They awaited another/others.
Additionally...these naughty spirits...is that why Linda broke even her own rules? Is their mischief the reason many of her Lexigrams have blatant meaning altering not allowed added words?

---

posted November 22, 2008 10:18 AM            

quote:

---

LEXX,

Thanks for making the corrections and your passionate participation!

---

posted November 22, 2008 10:47 AM            

quote:

---

Neither should you blindly accept, on your quest for truth, the validity of the star sign codes of the Universe I offer in this book-until you have practiced and carefully tested each one, so that you can decide for yourself rather than take my word for it.

---

quote:

---

However, I do not ask-nor do I even expect-any of you to regard my concepts as your truth, unless they should happen to agree with your own personal enlightenment and private convictions.

---

quote:

---

But real Truth can be found in one place only-in every man's and woman's communion with an eternal Source of hidden Knowledge within-which each individual must seek and find for himself or herself.

---

I do not believe that Linda had intended for any of us to set her up high upon a pedestal and worship her blindly nor even agree with her or follow her way, her path. I do not feel she wanted us to fear discussing her way and other ways of Lexigramming. I have seen too often folks acting as if her teachings are a religion and we should not question them anymore than we should question the Christian teachings or any other teachings. I truly believe she would not have wanted us to stop learning.

posted November 22, 2008 09:39 PM            

quote:

---

You might remember when I first came to this site, I told someone, it might have been you, about the 15 letter, 5 vowel rule in Star Signs, saying your lexigram was invalid because of it.

---

quote:

---

I had only recently read the book and I was still being initiated, and I feel that I still am now, but at least I'm more open-minded.

---

quote:

---

Anyway, you explained to me what you did here and told me that you've had more experience with Lexigramming than Linda had, so that was a good reminder to me to not jump to conclusions.

---

quote:

---

I'm going to have you proof-read it for errors.

---