Now what do you think of the ideas in the Da Vinci Code?
I think the following ideas, are very possible, naturally may be a good idea, to clarify what anyone means by 'god', but highly possible, don't you think?
-Jesus wasn't God -Jesus and Mary Magdalene were married and had children -The early Church invented the foundational doctrines of Christianity for the purpose of controlling the masses. -The Church conspired to hide the truth
The Da Vinci Code has been discredited. The promoters of the book and the movie believe in anti-Christian philosophies.
They follow that lie that Jesus wasn't called God by the early Chuch when early Church leaders like Tertullian, etc. before 325 A.D. in their own works called Jesus Christ God.
There is no evidence that Jesus married Mary Madeglene and had children at all. That's blasphemy. Also, the real church doesn't hide the truth at all. You can say that about the Papacy, but not the real Church of God.
Christians were oppressed because they refuse to worship the Roman Emperor as God. Real Christians don't want to control the masses at all in a dictatorship. Therefore, Da Vinci Code is a smokescreen in covering up real history in the world.
The Da Vinci Code has been discredited. The promoters of the book and the movie believe in anti-Christian philosophies.
Such as?
They follow that lie that Jesus wasn't called God by the early Chuch when early Church leaders like Tertullian, etc. before 325 A.D. in their own works called Jesus Christ God.
But did anyone ever ask Tertullian, what he meant by 'god'; what was Tertullian's interpretation of 'god' and if he was alive today, may he perhaps have the same interpretation or could it be possible he may change his mind?
There is no evidence that Jesus married Mary Madeglene and had children at all. That's blasphemy.
Have you seen the BBC Documentary: Did Jesus Die on the Cross?
Also, the real church doesn't hide the truth at all. You can say that about the Papacy, but not the real Church of God.
Not sure who the 'real church' is; cause I simply see allot of charlatans and second hand religion sales men...
Christians were oppressed because they refuse to worship the Roman Emperor as God.
Fair enough. Anyone should worship anyone or thing they want; and respect others to do the same.
Real Christians don't want to control the masses at all in a dictatorship.
Then why do they want everyone to live under their prescribed moral laws? Or which 'real christians' are you talking about?
Therefore, Da Vinci Code is a smokescreen in covering up real history in the world.
I dont understand, what you mean, please explain further.
The da vinci code does have anti-Christian philosophies. They include viewing Jesus as not God, viewing Jesus marrying Mary Madgalene plus having children, and bashing Christians as brainwashed fools.
Tertuallian interpetation as Jesus as God is very clear. There is no need for a big investigation of it. Many early church leaders like Ignatius and Cyprian blatantly called Jesus Christ as God. There is not evidence that Tertullian changed him mind. The Bible from John 1:1 is clear that the Word is God. The Word is Jesus Christ.
I've haven't seen the BBC Documentary, but the anti-Jesus documentary uses bias lies and discredited sources. The BBC has bashed the 9/11 Truth Movement with lies not only Christians before.
The real Christians are people that practice what they preach. Moral laws have nothing to do with embracing a dictatorship. Moral laws are apart of the Constitution and the Constitution aren't apart of a dictatorship overlty. Now, a dictatorship is the controlling of people's every day lives to the point of violating their individual liberty. Perjury, murder, rape, etc. have nothing to do with individual liberty, but crimes against humanity (and human liberty. That is why murder ends the liberty of another man). Therefore, moral laws in those areas are necessary in order to stabilize a society.
Da Vinci Code covers up true history since they don't really expose the true evil history of the Papacy, they lie about Christianity's origins plus doctrines, and they promote other lies like the Council of Nicea only affirming that Jesus is God. You need to understand that.
The da vinci code does have anti-Christian philosophies. They include viewing Jesus as not God, viewing Jesus marrying Mary Madgalene plus having children, and bashing Christians as brainwashed fools.
Frankly, I haven't come across one person on this planet who isn't a brainwashed fool, including myself. I imagine the sooner many people wake up to consider such a plausible reality, we may be capable of something remotely resembling sincere conversation, sincere relating, and meaningful life, from an inner perspective of meaning to another being...
But I won't hold my breath, cause the addiction to being goddamn fucking superior and never having been a brainwashed fool, and being important, and knowing it all, and having your ego taken care of, by everyone and sundry so you don't get offended, is quite the rage of the day in the billions of walking corpse oligarch demockery's.
And that's okay, I got no problem with fucking off, none whatsoever.... sprinkle my bodies ashes into the wind, and erase and delete, and burn anything and everytihng I ever wrote, because you are godamn fucking right I have no interest in some moron imbecile reading it after I am gone and choosing to interpret it, for their own financial gain... I have no fucking interest in being remembered by a planet of slave and cannon fodder breeding respectable professionals, who know everyting there is to know.
So, anyone who wants to remember me, after I am gone: Remember THIS: I DIDN'T FUCKING EXIST; SO FORGET ABOUT ME; AND FOCUS ON SOMETHING MUCH MORE IMPORTANT LIKE YOUR GODDAMN FUCKING EGO.
Tertuallian interpetation as Jesus as God is very clear. There is no need for a big investigation of it. Many early church leaders like Ignatius and Cyprian blatantly called Jesus Christ as God. There is not evidence that Tertullian changed him mind. The Bible from John 1:1 is clear that the Word is God. The Word is Jesus Christ.
If you say so. The point for you is that you believe what you said. I am happy for you. I couldn't give a flying fuck. If the word is Jesus Christ to you, then so be it. It isn't that to me. Words are just fucking words; nothing more nothing less. When they are uttered by people who don't mean them; they mean SWEET FUCK ALL.
If your interpretation of words from 2,000 years ago, repeatedly rewritten mean more to you, than me; there is sweet fuck all I can do about it.
The real Christians are people that practice what they preach.
Indeed.
Moral laws have nothing to do with embracing a dictatorship.
Bit of a problem, when every person on the planet has their own definition of what is 'moral' and what not; and in what context and what not; and when their 'morality laws' only apply to others, not themselves....
Eg. I can probably point out hundreds if not thousands and millions of blogs, who demand that Vice Pres. Cheney or someone or other, should practice 'transparency'; and then when it comes to them; they don't!!!!
So, tell me what I practice and don't preach, and your feedback will be INCREDIBLY FUCKING USEFUL. BUT FOR THE REST I AM AWARE OF THE MASSIVE HYPOCRISY, OF THE DOUBLE STANDARDS all around me... I see sweeet fuckall point, in regurgitating it, if the indivdiauls are not remotely interested in practicing what they preach, or even noticing that they don't practice what htey preach, and definitely not remotely interested in feedback about how they don't practice what they preach.
In my personal perspective; ONLY A FUCKING GODDAMN BRAINWASHED FOOL THINKS THEY CAN INSULATE THEMSELVES FROM CRITICISM, AND BRUTALLY HONEST FEEDBACK, AND NOT BE A BRAINWASHED FOOL; BRAINWASHED BY THEIR OWN EGO, REFUSING TO HEAR ANYTHING IT DOES NOT WANT TO HEAR.
Moral laws are apart of the Constitution and the Constitution aren't apart of a dictatorship overlty.
Be more specific and I am happy to comment.
Now, a dictatorship is the controlling of people's every day lives to the point of violating their individual liberty.
The line in the sand between individual liberty and state control thereof, is not the same for everyone, under all circumstances, and hardly clearly clarified anywhere; and that is the way the elite and lawyers like it. Dictators love vague langauge, which means whatever they want it to mean in different circumstnaces, so they don't have to practice what they preach.
Perjury, murder, rape, etc. have nothing to do with individual liberty, but crimes against humanity (and human liberty. That is why murder ends the liberty of another man).
I do not make myself the judge of a man who wants to depart this earth; and asks another to murder him. It is his choice, and his liberty to move on; and I respect his right to determine that.
Therefore, moral laws in those areas are necessary in order to stabilize a society.
Again, very vague, cause one man's 'moral laws' are not anothers and when you got lawyers, judges etc. who demand morals of otehrs they don't themselves live up to, you got yourself a very unstable psychological, emotional and society; in my opinion, based upon my defintiion of 'stability'.
Furthermore, as for a 'stable' society' I ain't seen much stability from 2000 years of slave and cannon fodder breeding moral laws hypocrisy; but perhaps I have a different interpretation of 'stability' to most people.
Da Vinci Code covers up true history since they don't really expose the true evil history of the Papacy, they lie about Christianity's origins plus doctrines, and they promote other lies like the Council of Nicea only affirming that Jesus is God. You need to understand that.
I imagine you are correct, and from what I have read, I would agree, and defer to your judgement; I imagine you know more about the issue than I do; and I accordingly don't consider myself sufficient in knowledge to comment, on the accuracy of what the Da Vinci code covers or not; and how accurately or not, based upon available accurate (says who?) data, not to mention accurate interpretations of perspecetives and opinions from 2,000 years ago.
I did not think the writer meant it as an 'accurate non-fictional' book, more like a fictional book sprinkled with some of what he considered truths and others not.
And frankly I'm not sure anyone knows the true perspectives to Christianity's doctrines; but that there are thousands who profess they -- with utter certainty -- do, is an obvious reality.
As far as I can conclude, man invented 'religion' and what the quantity and quality of 'absolute God truth' there is to it, I haven't a faintest clue; I can only speak for what my guts and conscious reason tells me. Others appear to be of the opinion that they know it all; with absolutel certainty.
Absolute certainty is obviously something that is tremendously comforting to indviduals who are psychologically and emotionally, insecure; who feel a need for existential certainty. Some are more than willing to deceive themselves, in order to 'know' with that quality of certainty. I am not.
Sorry I don't believe in your assumption that all humans are brainwashed fool. Humans can't know every aspect of the Universe, but that doesn't mean that all humans are brainwashed fools at all. Also, tons of people accept reality and don't need to sell out their religious beliefs in order to discover the truth.
Also, there are absolutes truths in the world. It's not about me being right. It's about people like me having a right to outline the truth and expose lies form the Da Vinci Code. Also, I presented evidence why that book is a lie (because it talked about the Council of Nicea being a time where the Church accepted Jesus as God, etc.). If you don't like this reality, then that is your affair.
If you don't want to have children, that's your business. Yet, I have a right to respect population growth and expose the pro-new world order philosophies of eugenics and population control. I don't worship my Ego. I worship God, which is beyond my personal ego. All human life have value and purpose. You just disagree with that and accept a nihilistic, pessemetic view of life. I don't.
YOu don't have to take my word for it. You can look up John 1:1 for your self and see that the the Word or Jesus is called God. You can also look at the writings of Tertullian, Ignatius, and others accepting the Diety of Jesus Christ. This is found in the early church and exposes the Da Vinci Code completely.
Words are special. Words can outline reality and facts. You denying that reality is desperation on your part. Your constant usage of profanity just because you are refuted on this issue is very tacky. Also, those words existing 2,000 years ago are perserved for a very long time before you were born. Also, those words have been validated over those 2,000 years as well.
You accept moral relativism. Morality in some cases aren't different in different times. The reason is that cultures the world over have always held onto universal moral absolutes like being against murder, being against rape, etc. No one is immune from criticism. Likewise, real morality is always immune from being opposed in my mind. Killing another human, rape, etc. have nothing to do with real liberty.
It's about the violation of another person's liberty. Violating someone's else liberty by hurting that person is a clear case of violating moral principles. You can reject it if you wish, but that doesn't refute the case for moral absolutes at all.
The rest of your comments are filled with half truth. Embracing real morality has nothing to do with being vague. The essence of morality is about preventing an innocent human being from treating another innocent human being immorally via rape, perjury, murder, assault, etc. That isn't vague. That's purely transparent.
There is absolute certainly about many spheres of life. One single example is the concept of mathematics. If mathematics have absolutes and certainities, why can't we have certainities about God, morality, and other concepts in the Universe? You seem to be an agnostic in terms of your religious beliefs. It's stereotypical to assume that absolute certainity is embraced by mentally insecure human beings. Math, science, etc. proves that certainities are apart of basic realities in the Universe.
I shall respond to your recent comments -- hopefully tomorrow -- cause now it is late, and I would prefer to give them attention when I am not rushing, just for the sake of replying.
I don't disagree with all you say, but on quick reading, I imagine quite a bit, based upon my interpretation, and naturally my interpretation of what you are really saying could be incorrect.
However, wherever I may truely disagree with you (consciously or unconsciously) my principle on the matter is no matter how much I disagree with you, or to what extent I disagree with you; I will defend to the death your right to say it.
Till then, I don't love you any less, sometimes I am very irritated, with circumstances, and sometimes I even somewhat blame you for those circumstances, and yet I am hamstrung by my principle that until you are given the opportunity to defend yourself, in person; and anyway I imagine even if you were responsible, I am committed to getting over my anger, and forgiveness, and that is what I would do; no matter how difficult.
So, I the rest can wait for tomorrow or another day.
Phantom Timothy,
ReplyDeleteNow what do you think of the ideas in the Da Vinci Code?
I think the following ideas, are very possible, naturally may be a good idea, to clarify what anyone means by 'god', but highly possible, don't you think?
-Jesus wasn't God
-Jesus and Mary Magdalene were married and had children
-The early Church invented the foundational doctrines of Christianity for the purpose of controlling the masses.
-The Church conspired to hide the truth
Lara
The Da Vinci Code has been discredited. The promoters of the book and the movie believe in anti-Christian philosophies.
ReplyDeleteThey follow that lie that Jesus wasn't called God by the early Chuch when early Church leaders like Tertullian, etc. before 325 A.D. in their own works called Jesus Christ God.
There is no evidence that Jesus married Mary Madeglene and had children at all. That's blasphemy. Also, the real church doesn't hide the truth at all. You can say that about the Papacy, but not the real Church of God.
Christians were oppressed because they refuse to worship the Roman Emperor as God. Real Christians don't want to control the masses at all in a dictatorship. Therefore, Da Vinci Code is a smokescreen in covering up real history in the world.
By Timothy
Okay, now I am confused....
ReplyDeleteThe Da Vinci Code has been discredited. The promoters of the book and the movie believe in anti-Christian philosophies.
Such as?
They follow that lie that Jesus wasn't called God by the early Chuch when early Church leaders like Tertullian, etc. before 325 A.D. in their own works called Jesus Christ God.
But did anyone ever ask Tertullian, what he meant by 'god'; what was Tertullian's interpretation of 'god' and if he was alive today, may he perhaps have the same interpretation or could it be possible he may change his mind?
There is no evidence that Jesus married Mary Madeglene and had children at all. That's blasphemy.
Have you seen the BBC Documentary: Did Jesus Die on the Cross?
Also, the real church doesn't hide the truth at all. You can say that about the Papacy, but not the real Church of God.
Not sure who the 'real church' is; cause I simply see allot of charlatans and second hand religion sales men...
Christians were oppressed because they refuse to worship the Roman Emperor as God.
Fair enough. Anyone should worship anyone or thing they want; and respect others to do the same.
Real Christians don't want to control the masses at all in a dictatorship.
Then why do they want everyone to live under their prescribed moral laws? Or which 'real christians' are you talking about?
Therefore, Da Vinci Code is a smokescreen in covering up real history in the world.
I dont understand, what you mean, please explain further.
Lara
The da vinci code does have anti-Christian philosophies. They include viewing Jesus as not God, viewing Jesus marrying Mary Madgalene plus having children, and bashing Christians as brainwashed fools.
ReplyDeleteTertuallian interpetation as Jesus as God is very clear. There is no need for a big investigation of it. Many early church leaders like Ignatius and Cyprian blatantly called Jesus Christ as God. There is not evidence that Tertullian changed him mind. The Bible from John 1:1 is clear that the Word is God. The Word is Jesus Christ.
I've haven't seen the BBC Documentary, but the anti-Jesus documentary uses bias lies and discredited sources. The BBC has bashed the 9/11 Truth Movement with lies not only Christians before.
The real Christians are people that practice what they preach. Moral laws have nothing to do with embracing a dictatorship. Moral laws are apart of the Constitution and the Constitution aren't apart of a dictatorship overlty. Now, a dictatorship is the controlling of people's every day lives to the point of violating their individual liberty. Perjury, murder, rape, etc. have nothing to do with individual liberty, but crimes against humanity (and human liberty. That is why murder ends the liberty of another man). Therefore, moral laws in those areas are necessary in order to stabilize a society.
Da Vinci Code covers up true history since they don't really expose the true evil history of the Papacy, they lie about Christianity's origins plus doctrines, and they promote other lies like the Council of Nicea only affirming that Jesus is God. You need to understand that.
By Timothy
The da vinci code does have anti-Christian philosophies. They include viewing Jesus as not God, viewing Jesus marrying Mary Madgalene plus having children, and bashing Christians as brainwashed fools.
ReplyDeleteFrankly, I haven't come across one person on this planet who isn't a brainwashed fool, including myself. I imagine the sooner many people wake up to consider such a plausible reality, we may be capable of something remotely resembling sincere conversation, sincere relating, and meaningful life, from an inner perspective of meaning to another being...
But I won't hold my breath, cause the addiction to being goddamn fucking superior and never having been a brainwashed fool, and being important, and knowing it all, and having your ego taken care of, by everyone and sundry so you don't get offended, is quite the rage of the day in the billions of walking corpse oligarch demockery's.
And that's okay, I got no problem with fucking off, none whatsoever.... sprinkle my bodies ashes into the wind, and erase and delete, and burn anything and everytihng I ever wrote, because you are godamn fucking right I have no interest in some moron imbecile reading it after I am gone and choosing to interpret it, for their own financial gain... I have no fucking interest in being remembered by a planet of slave and cannon fodder breeding respectable professionals, who know everyting there is to know.
So, anyone who wants to remember me, after I am gone: Remember THIS: I DIDN'T FUCKING EXIST; SO FORGET ABOUT ME; AND FOCUS ON SOMETHING MUCH MORE IMPORTANT LIKE YOUR GODDAMN FUCKING EGO.
Tertuallian interpetation as Jesus as God is very clear. There is no need for a big investigation of it. Many early church leaders like Ignatius and Cyprian blatantly called Jesus Christ as God. There is not evidence that Tertullian changed him mind. The Bible from John 1:1 is clear that the Word is God. The Word is Jesus Christ.
If you say so. The point for you is that you believe what you said. I am happy for you. I couldn't give a flying fuck. If the word is Jesus Christ to you, then so be it. It isn't that to me. Words are just fucking words; nothing more nothing less. When they are uttered by people who don't mean them; they mean SWEET FUCK ALL.
If your interpretation of words from 2,000 years ago, repeatedly rewritten mean more to you, than me; there is sweet fuck all I can do about it.
The real Christians are people that practice what they preach.
Indeed.
Moral laws have nothing to do with embracing a dictatorship.
Bit of a problem, when every person on the planet has their own definition of what is 'moral' and what not; and in what context and what not; and when their 'morality laws' only apply to others, not themselves....
Eg. I can probably point out hundreds if not thousands and millions of blogs, who demand that Vice Pres. Cheney or someone or other, should practice 'transparency'; and then when it comes to them; they don't!!!!
So, tell me what I practice and don't preach, and your feedback will be INCREDIBLY FUCKING USEFUL.
BUT FOR THE REST I AM AWARE OF THE MASSIVE HYPOCRISY, OF THE DOUBLE STANDARDS all around me... I see sweeet fuckall point, in regurgitating it, if the indivdiauls are not remotely interested in practicing what they preach, or even noticing that they don't practice what htey preach, and definitely not remotely interested in feedback about how they don't practice what they preach.
In my personal perspective; ONLY A FUCKING GODDAMN BRAINWASHED FOOL THINKS THEY CAN INSULATE THEMSELVES FROM CRITICISM, AND BRUTALLY HONEST FEEDBACK, AND NOT BE A BRAINWASHED FOOL; BRAINWASHED BY THEIR OWN EGO, REFUSING TO HEAR ANYTHING IT DOES NOT WANT TO HEAR.
Moral laws are apart of the Constitution and the Constitution aren't apart of a dictatorship overlty.
Be more specific and I am happy to comment.
Now, a dictatorship is the controlling of people's every day lives to the point of violating their individual liberty.
The line in the sand between individual liberty and state control thereof, is not the same for everyone, under all circumstances, and hardly clearly clarified anywhere; and that is the way the elite and lawyers like it. Dictators love vague langauge, which means whatever they want it to mean in different circumstnaces, so they don't have to practice what they preach.
Perjury, murder, rape, etc. have nothing to do with individual liberty, but crimes against humanity (and human liberty. That is why murder ends the liberty of another man).
I do not make myself the judge of a man who wants to depart this earth; and asks another to murder him. It is his choice, and his liberty to move on; and I respect his right to determine that.
Therefore, moral laws in those areas are necessary in order to stabilize a society.
Again, very vague, cause one man's 'moral laws' are not anothers and when you got lawyers, judges etc. who demand morals of otehrs they don't themselves live up to, you got yourself a very unstable psychological, emotional and society; in my opinion, based upon my defintiion of 'stability'.
Furthermore, as for a 'stable' society' I ain't seen much stability from 2000 years of slave and cannon fodder breeding moral laws hypocrisy; but perhaps I have a different interpretation of 'stability' to most people.
Da Vinci Code covers up true history since they don't really expose the true evil history of the Papacy, they lie about Christianity's origins plus doctrines, and they promote other lies like the Council of Nicea only affirming that Jesus is God. You need to understand that.
I imagine you are correct, and from what I have read, I would agree, and defer to your judgement; I imagine you know more about the issue than I do; and I accordingly don't consider myself sufficient in knowledge to comment, on the accuracy of what the Da Vinci code covers or not; and how accurately or not, based upon available accurate (says who?) data, not to mention accurate interpretations of perspecetives and opinions from 2,000 years ago.
I did not think the writer meant it as an 'accurate non-fictional' book, more like a fictional book sprinkled with some of what he considered truths and others not.
And frankly I'm not sure anyone knows the true perspectives to Christianity's doctrines; but that there are thousands who profess they -- with utter certainty -- do, is an obvious reality.
As far as I can conclude, man invented 'religion' and what the quantity and quality of 'absolute God truth' there is to it, I haven't a faintest clue; I can only speak for what my guts and conscious reason tells me. Others appear to be of the opinion that they know it all; with absolutel certainty.
Absolute certainty is obviously something that is tremendously comforting to indviduals who are psychologically and emotionally, insecure; who feel a need for existential certainty. Some are more than willing to deceive themselves, in order to 'know' with that quality of certainty. I am not.
Lara
Here's my response to you:
ReplyDeleteSorry I don't believe in your assumption that all humans are brainwashed fool. Humans can't know every aspect of the Universe, but that doesn't mean that all humans are brainwashed fools at all. Also, tons of people accept reality and don't need to sell out their religious beliefs in order to discover the truth.
Also, there are absolutes truths in the world. It's not about me being right. It's about people like me having a right to outline the truth and expose lies form the Da Vinci Code. Also, I presented evidence why that book is a lie (because it talked about the Council of Nicea being a time where the Church accepted Jesus as God, etc.). If you don't like this reality, then that is your affair.
If you don't want to have children, that's your business. Yet, I have a right to respect population growth and expose the pro-new world order philosophies of eugenics and population control. I don't worship my Ego. I worship God, which is beyond my personal ego. All human life have value and purpose. You just disagree with that and accept a nihilistic, pessemetic view of life. I don't.
YOu don't have to take my word for it. You can look up John 1:1 for your self and see that the the Word or Jesus is called God. You can also look at the writings of Tertullian, Ignatius, and others accepting the Diety of Jesus Christ. This is found in the early church and exposes the Da Vinci Code completely.
Words are special. Words can outline reality and facts. You denying that reality is desperation on your part. Your constant usage of profanity just because you are refuted on this issue is very tacky. Also, those words existing 2,000 years ago are perserved for a very long time before you were born. Also, those words have been validated over those 2,000 years as well.
ReplyDeleteYou accept moral relativism. Morality in some cases aren't different in different times. The reason is that cultures the world over have always held onto universal moral absolutes like being against murder, being against rape, etc. No one is immune from criticism. Likewise, real morality is always immune from being opposed in my mind. Killing another human, rape, etc. have nothing to do with real liberty.
It's about the violation of another person's liberty. Violating someone's else liberty by hurting that person is a clear case of violating moral principles. You can reject it if you wish, but that doesn't refute the case for moral absolutes at all.
The rest of your comments are filled with half truth. Embracing real morality has nothing to do with being vague. The essence of morality is about preventing an innocent human being from treating another innocent human being immorally via rape, perjury, murder, assault, etc. That isn't vague. That's purely transparent.
There is absolute certainly about many spheres of life. One single example is the concept of mathematics. If mathematics have absolutes and certainities, why can't we have certainities about God, morality, and other concepts in the Universe? You seem to be an agnostic in terms of your religious beliefs. It's stereotypical to assume that absolute certainity is embraced by mentally insecure human beings. Math, science, etc. proves that certainities are apart of basic realities in the Universe.
Moral absolutes aren't about lawyers vaguely interpretating rules. It's about preventing innocent people from being harmed in an immoral way.
ReplyDeleteI shall respond to your recent comments -- hopefully tomorrow -- cause now it is late, and I would prefer to give them attention when I am not rushing, just for the sake of replying.
ReplyDeleteI don't disagree with all you say, but on quick reading, I imagine quite a bit, based upon my interpretation, and naturally my interpretation of what you are really saying could be incorrect.
However, wherever I may truely disagree with you (consciously or unconsciously) my principle on the matter is no matter how much I disagree with you, or to what extent I disagree with you; I will defend to the death your right to say it.
Till then, I don't love you any less, sometimes I am very irritated, with circumstances, and sometimes I even somewhat blame you for those circumstances, and yet I am hamstrung by my principle that until you are given the opportunity to defend yourself, in person; and anyway I imagine even if you were responsible, I am committed to getting over my anger, and forgiveness, and that is what I would do; no matter how difficult.
So, I the rest can wait for tomorrow or another day.
Lara