Agreed. Very disappointed
"We are quite literally called to judge and hold others accountable for their actions, just as others are supposed to hold us accountable.
Judge lest not he be judged is by far the most misconstrued out of context verse in the entire Bible"
That's what you wrote and I assumed it was a typo. Not so sure anymore so just in case you don't know, it is "Judge not, that ye be not judged." Or "Judge not lest ye be judged" or versions of that depending on which Bible you use.
This is polar opposite of what you wrote. Judge him or he won't be judged.
Shortly thereafter he says to discern people "pearls before swine". I think you if you even knew the actual quote and just made a typo are confounding things that can be deducted from the text.
Being discerning is necessary. I think he is referencing Ecclesiastes "don't speak wisdom to a fool, they will only resent you" (something I hope I am not doing now)
But that is different then laying a judgement on someone's character. The plank in the eye bit makes that seem a logical conclusion.
Of course he also says that the old laws stand so presumably that means the punishments as well and thus this is not what is meant by judgement here.
For instance, take a guy like Charles Manson. He can be tried and sentenced. You can be discerning in not wanting to associate with him. But you shouldn't judge him in the sense to think you would be better than him maybe. If you read about his childhood it is hard to imagine he wouldn't come out a monster. It is similar to loving your enemies. It is with a heavy heart that a guy like Manson should be locked up.
Are we ssure you are a reliable authority? Your MO is awefully similar to the AZ election supervisors. No audit, no confidence.
Wow, you are so cool. I'm guessing you are the one who misconstrued now haha
I guess it'll remain misconstrued then, as you say.
So you tgubk it immoral to sit on a jury? To appeal to the state instead of God judgement? Help me understand.
Care to elaborate?
You are not a nice person. I hope you find peace.
Well they're hoping to get a neo con in. If dems can rig both primaries and election they can rig primaries is what they're hoping.
Also not sure how your comment makes sense. In general I think her testimony helps the prosecution. I'm sure being a "snitch" against the police is tolerated in their community just like burning down police departments.
So it was just a mistype? Here is the comment I responded to. You said there was a term called "heard". Not sure who doesn't know snitch and obviously snitch is listed.
–Judiwont 3 hours ago +32 / -2 Ok, don’t be so sensitive. Have you never heard that term heard? Do you not think she Wil be labeled as such?
I'm not familiar with the term. And I can't find it on urbandictionary or another definition fot it on dictionary.com. Can you enlighten me.
Holy crap this is hillarious!
Update: Jovan Pulitzer is saying the ballot scanning will include these things. Very good news if true. No idea why Sen Fann talks around it.
This is a hand recount where fraud detection does not seem to be the number 1 priority if at all?
Karen Fann Call 602 926 5874 Email [email protected]
Show up if possible to nicely respectfully and peacefully let her know a sham recount instead of
1 verifying signitures,
2 verifying ballot paper,
3 verifying creases, and
4 verifying marks were not machine made will cause only much more unrest in this country.
Let her know that we will support her if her does not bend to RINO pressure.
And
Demand a real audit!
Update: Jovan Pulitzer is saying the ballot scanning will include these things. Very good news if true. No idea why Sen Fann talks around it.
This is a hand recount where fraud detection does not seem to be the number 1 priority if at all?
Karen Fann Call 602 926 5874 Email [email protected]
Show up if possible to nicely respectfully and peacefully let her know a sham recount instead of
1 verifying signitures,
2 verifying ballot paper,
3 verifying creases, and
4 verifying marks were not machine made will cause only much more unrest in this country.
Let her know that we will support her if her does not bend to RINO pressure.
And
Demand a real audit!
It could definitely be statistically significant and likely is. What is the chance of flipping a quarter and having it land heads 30 times in a row.
The question is was this caused by Obamacare. Probably but the causal link needs to be demonstrated. It would help if there was a breakdown between population segments that had plans changed and those that didn't and so on.
Wow are you saying past actions matter and you'd even vote for a woman to primary them? Maybe you're not into identity politics after all.
Ok keep voting mitt Romney, McConnell and Graham. You're an idiot.
lol ok, Lara Loomer is a RINO. Well just because someone votes and takes msga actions for years doesn't mean they are still maga. Past performance is not indicative of future performance. Trump isn't maga. Maybe Biden will wake up maga tomorrow. Get your head out of your ass.
I gave you the link and timestamp to knowledge. If that is me casting pearls before swine so be it.
As for your own quote. This was made with a foreknowledge of the great cost in life the civil war was and would be. It was made also with the expectation of a possible race war afterwards. It was made while slavery itself was already dying and becoming objectionable even in the south to a growing degree. Contemplating what the right thing to do is hard. He can certainly be faulted for making the federal government too powerful but it can't be denied that the civil war was greatly a war around slavery nor that his sentiments in the midst of the bloody war are not human and maybe even honorable.
Here is your quote. Written in a letter August 1862
"If there be those who would not save the Union, unless they could at the same time save slavery, I do not agree with them. If there be those who would not save the Union unless they could at the same time destroy slavery, I do not agree with them. My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union. I shall do less whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts the cause, and I shall do more whenever I shall believe doing more will help the cause. I shall try to correct errors when shown to be errors; and I shall adopt new views so fast as they shall appear to be true views.
I have here stated my purpose according to my view of official duty; and I intend no modification of my oft-expressed personal wish that all men every where could be free."
Just because someone is a war hero it doesn't mean they are maga so it is a false equivalency.
Also, that's a very simplistic view of Lincoln. I'd suggest reading Black Rednecks and White liberals. Start from 4 hours 15 minutes in.
That said the expansion of the power of the federal goverment to the degree that happened was definitively a bad consequence.
And Trump doesn't like attention? His whole life for decades before running was about attention. That doesn't mean his values are bad. In fact people who like negative MSM attention should be valued. They have branded themselves and are strong enough that they won't cave.
People take action before they run. Example Bobert and her restaurant. Or that giri that had Mexican climb Pelosi's wall, who interrupted Hamilton, who chained herself to Facebook's logo, who criticized Ilhan Omar to her face?
If you want to elect good politicians how about looking at their actions before they get elected lol. Or just go on and keep voting McConnell, Graham, Romney and so on.
Again you're making a semantic arguement. Plus the plank verse as well as the pearls before swine and speaking wisdom to fools verses disagree on one's duty. Do you think it is a sin to pass a homeless guy on the street?
And criticizing me for "writing a book"? Seriously? Take the plank out man. Engaging in discussion on a discussion site and taking the time to actually be nuanced, what's wrong with that?