how soon we forget

[Truman]

The things you read on a chat board...

What's next? You Rhodes Scholars all gonna argue over who can pee farther? Merriam-Webster-on-a-pony...

[LTS TRN 2]

How soon we try to forget or ignore that a terrible crime has been committed--with the result of two horrific wars of catastrophic disaster, all on behalf of a demented and utterly criminal race-state experiment currently bleeding your tax dollars each year by the billions with interest.

WW

[Jay in Phoenix]

Let me help you out here, Jay. And I'll probably go off on a few tangents, so bear with me.

There are a few aspects of this discussion that merit clarification. Let's first start with the distinction between murder and homicide. Murder is a legal term; it's what people who intentionally and illegally kill other people are charged with and often convicted of. Despite the example cited by Goobs re Wisconsin law (which is actually just a fancy way of describing a particular type of manslaughter), nobody in this country is doing time for being convicted of committing the crime of homicide; they're either convicted of murder or manslaughter, which ARE crimes. To put it in mathematical terms, murder is a subset of homicide; all murders are homicide, but not all homicides are murder. They're not synonymous, but I think you might already get that.

Smackie, I appreciate your reasoned and intelligent approach. But thanks anyway, I don't need the assist. As I've already explained, I understand the legal separation of the terms murder and homicide. But we're getting into semantics here, and given the original use of the words in describing the taking of life, especially an infants' life in the history of Biblical context, we're veering off-subject. Let's keep this train-wreck of a thread back on course. It is true, no one is convicted of the crime "homicide". Yet, the department of the police, as I referenced to mvscal, that handles murder, is the HOMICIDE department. The terms of murder and homicide can be and often are analogous. Perhaps not synonymous, but still one can imply the other. That is the point. The rest of it is just a distraction.

Let's move on to the word innocence. This is not a legal term. When defendants are acquitted of crimes with which they've been charged, they are NOT found to be innocent. They are found to be "not guilty." This may seem to be simply an issue of semantics, but it isn't, as we shall soon see. In our society, and getting away from legalese, guilt and innocence relate to doing as opposed to being; if you haven't DONE anything wrong, you're innocent and cannot be guilty. But this view is not universal. To some, the commission or non-commission of any particular criminal act has little or no bearing on the determination of guilt or innocence. To al-Qaeda, those killed in the 9/11 attacks weren't considered by the terrorists to be guilty of doing anything in particular, but that didn't make them innocent, either. In their minds, the victims were guilty of being American. Those killed during the Holocaust were guilty of being Jewish. Blacks who were lynched in our country were guilty of being Negroes. And the babies killed during the Passover were guilty of being Egyptian. The bolded portion of the first definition you provided of innocence alludes to this. A baby born from Egyptian parents is certainly innocent, in our view, of having committed any act that could be considered criminal. But their being acquainted with evil, i.e., having Egyptian parents, precluded them from being considered innocent. This may seem fucked up, and it is based on our society's view of guilt and innocence. But to try to apply our views universally across different times and cultures is a mistake.

Okay, I can certainly see what you're attempting to get at here. But you're getting into a societal/historical/Biblical use of the "concept" of innocence. Let's take the reverse, to be guilty of something. You state that babies killed during the Passover were "guilty" of being Egyptian. That blacks were "guilty" of being Negroes. That to al-Qaeda, the victims on the planes and in the buildings were "guilty" of being Americans. And you say that trying to apply our society's stance of legal guilt and innocence doesn't apply to different cultures and historical eras. However, unless you are buying into the religious misconception of "Original Sin", or how the degradation of guilt is applied to a being just because they happened to be born into one particular race or creed, then you miss the point of the concepts of guilt and sin as a whole. Nobody is born into sin. No baby is guilty of anything other than being born in the first place, and you can hardly call that guilt. Just because other cultures and societies have a warped perspective and a view askew from logic and common sense, doesn't make it right. Those historical examples you cited were indeed, "fucked up". And justification of murder not being murder, just because some lunatic says his "God" said it was okay, is pure lunacy.

The tablets, assuming they existed, were not written in English. This is simply a translation error. I mentioned in a previous post that the 6th Commandment in Greek & Hebrew specify murder. As translated by the Book of Common Prayer, it reads, "Thou shalt do no murder."

The imperative is against unlawful killing resulting in bloodguilt. The Hebrew Bible contains numerous prohibitions against unlawful killing, but also allows for justified killing in the context of warfare (1Kings 2:5–6), capital punishment (Leviticus 20:9–16) and self-defence (Exodus 22:2–3). The New Testament is in agreement that murder is a grave moral evil, and maintains the Old Testament view of bloodguilt.

Hope this helps.

And of course, herein lies the problem with the translation and interpretation of the Commandments. We first must assume they existed. For the sake of argument, let's say they did. Since we don't have the actual Tablets to look at, nobody, and I mean, nobody knows exactly what they said, or more precisely, how they were worded. Translations and transcriptions have been going on for countless years, and each and every re-translation garbles the original text, whatever it may have been, worse than the time before. Too many historical cooks stirring the holy broth. However, again, for the sake of argument, let's go with "Thou shalt do no murder." And that is precisely what the so-called Hebrew God did, he annihilated every first born in the House of Egypt, including babies. That makes the big Guy a cold-blooded killer, end of story. Those babies were guilty of nothing more than being born, and if that makes them deserve to be slaughtered, then the Hebrew God is no better than Hitler or Stalin, or any other psycho who commits atrocities for the sake of their own imagined empirical righteousness and whim.

[Smackie Chan]

Don't wanna c&p to address your points, Jay. I'll just say that when discussions such as these are not bounded by right vs wrong, moral vs immoral, concept vs reality, legal vs illegal, now vs then, our culture vs other cultures, one interpretation or translation vs another, or this definition vs that one, we end up with train wrecks such as this. There has to be agreement among the debate participants as to what exactly is being debated, and certain assumptions need to be made. That has not happened in this thread, so here we are. A discussion limited by agreed-to boundaries would be much more constructive. But it ain't gonna happen here.

[Mikey]

If the whole world could just be Jim Rome and friends then we wouldn't have to worry about murder.

[Jay in Phoenix]

Indeed Mikey, indeed. Just take a gander at ML@Coyote's latest thread and some of my additions, if you want some old-school memories.

And Smackie, I couldn't agree more. I would love to have a reasoned and sane discussion of this subject, let alone the one that began this meandering thread. But if the mvscals monkeys of the world are going to continue to sling feces at the walls, what else can you expect. Monkeys sling, monkeys poo.

[poptart]

As written (KILL, as used for the 6th Commandment in the King James), it forbids the taking of life - accidentally, justifiably, or otherwise - of ANY living being.

If you pluck just this verse out of the Bible and look at it, yes, it does.

But as we've both know, when looking at Bible verses, you must take note of both the context and the overall Bible.
As we've both already noted, God instructed the Israelites to KILL in some circumstances, so it's obvious that God's intention for the 6th Commandment wasn't to place a total ban on... killing.

Btw, the King James translates Raw-tsakh as both KILL and MURDER in different places.
KILL - Exodus 20:13 (6th Commandment) and Deuteronomy 5:17.
MURDER - Jeremiah 7:9 and Hosea 6:9.

what is being proscribed is murder - the intentional and unlawful taking of human life. Thou shalt not kill in no way makes this clear.

I do agree.
It IS clear if you look at the other instructions God gave to the Israelites, however.

If MURDER is used for God's 6th Commandment, then "right and wrong" is subject to the whims of human law - for as was noted, one culture may declare an act to be murder and another culture may not.


Words are fun. haha

[poptart]

"Thou shalt do no murder." And that is precisely what the so-called Hebrew God did, he annihilated every first born in the House of Egypt, including babies. That makes the big Guy a cold-blooded killer, end of story.

God didn't give the Commandments for Himself.

He gave them for the Israelites, and all humanity - who, umm... HE CREATED.

We all know that we have limited time to live on this planet.

May the Creator not decide when the creation's time is up?

Are you slightly arrogant? haha

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

God didn't give the Commandments for Himself.

"Do as I say, not as I do."



Yeah...awesome god you got there. Sounds just like Obama.

[poptart]

This just in...

Marty is not God.

[Van]

He gave them for the Israelites, and all humanity - who, umm... HE CREATED.

We all know that we have limited time to live on this planet.

May the Creator not decide when the creation's time is up?

Proving once again that the God of the Bible is a sadistic asshole and his followers are worse than sheep.

[Truman]

So how bad ARE sheep?

Have you had actual experience with sheep?

Mace wants to know...

[LTS TRN 2]

You dull eyed cows have gathered in what Texans call a "slaughter circle"...where you wait for your inevitable and proper plug in the forehead.

Seriously, have the Christer loons and the resident Limpdick parrot carried the soft brained to a safe repose...to wait for your culling?

You're supposed to be dealing with the fact that your nation and the world's economy has been hijacked, raped, and dumped on the highway like some Mexican cartel victim by a renegade and desperately cornered Ponzi scam lyin', stealin', and murdering fake Russian crime state. And you're...parsing the King James gibberish? Are you really so pathetic?

[Smackie Chan]

If MURDER is used for God's 6th Commandment, then "right and wrong" is subject to the whims of human law - for as was noted, one culture may declare an act to be murder and another culture may not.

That doesn't change when kill is used instead of murder. The whims of human law would then have to distinguish between rightful and wrongful killing, which is no different than distinguishing between murder and justifiable homicide.

As a non-believer, I don't really care how it reads, and I know what its meaning is, 'cuz I can conjecturize & stuff. As you stated, words are fun, and I'm a big fan of using the right words and trying to avoid confusion & ambiguity. To put it into language that may be more palatable for you, "There is no Heaven but clarity, No Hell except confusion."

[Smackie Chan]

You're supposed to be dealing with the fact that your nation and the world's economy has been hijacked, raped, and dumped on the highway like some Mexican cartel victim by a renegade and desperately cornered Ponzi scam lyin', stealin', and murdering fake Russian crime state.

How are YOU dealing with it? By posting the same inane gibberish post after post to an audience that tuned you out over a decade ago? "WW" is not a solution, though I'm sure you'd consider it a first step. I KNOW I'm going to regret asking this, but what should be the next step after WW?

[Shlomart Ben Yisrael]

I KNOW I'm going to regret asking this, but what should be the next step after WW?

For me it's usually PP (pissy pissy)...

...followed up by CC (coffee coffee).

[Mikey]

I know it doesn't fit the pattern, but for me the CC is followed (hopefully) but OHD.


one huge dump

[LTS TRN 2]

I KNOW I'm going to regret asking this, but what should be the next step after WW?

He will probably have to get back to you later on that one (at least until Soros tells Daily Kos what to tell the lemmings what comes after WW).

Seriously? Well, "wakey waking" would certainly entail putting the kabosh on the grotesquely disproportionate influence of AIPAC and its neocon cabal upon our government. It would mean revealing the actual crimes of the vile fake state over the years so people can understand that there's nothing anti-Jewish at all in opposing the entity known as Zionism. Just as all Germans were not Nazis, so too all Jews are certainly not Zionists. The issue of the fake state takes precedence because of the central role it has come to play in our foreign policy and basic congressional function.

Further Wakey Waking would entail revealing and acknowledging the degree to which all major media has been consolidated into only six huge corporations. The owning of news is a form of total power that would glaze the eyes of Goebbels.

Don't kid yourselves as to the crucial importance of people simply knowing the truth. What's your excuse?

[Moving Sale]

Wow, you must hang out with a ton of pilots then, because I know hundreds and very few if any of them subscribe to the "it is a government lie and fabrication."

As for "the cell phone lie" I am guessing you are talking about Barbara Olson. I don't know enough of the details regarding that specific situation to have an opinion.

See that is the difference between my friends and you they didn't guess or 'not know enough ... details' before they made up their minds. Are your friends that believe the 911 lie as ill informed on the subject as you?

I have at times forgotten to turn my phone off and it will ring or get a text while in flight.

What is the highest alt that that has happened? What is the highest alt you have ever had an actual conversation?

Better yet why don't you go check out one of the pilot forum boards and see what they think on the issue of a government lie and fabrication.

I'm asking you.

[Left Seater]

Are your friends that think 9/11 was a government plot as high as you?



The highest altitude I have ever spoken on a cell phone in a plane was prolly mid 30K. Same for a text. Although I have never answered my phone while in the left seat.

[LTS TRN 2]

How medicated do you have to stay in order to accept the Orwellian inversion of reality force fed to the public concerning the New Pearl Harbor Day? You're cool with the Warren Commission too, right? Just checking.

[Mace]

What is the highest alt you have ever had an actual conversation?

Oh, about 5'2".

Sin,

Moving Sale

[Derron]

What is the highest alt that that has happened? What is the highest alt you have ever had an actual conversation?

Ever heard of this thing called the space station ? You can easily make contact with it on any number of radio bands..a cell phone in the the 800-900 mghz range can easily transmit / receive several hundred miles, especially to or from an aircraft, but with cell repeaters every 5 miles or so across this country, probably not going to need to do that. Tell me you knew that ankle biter.

[LTS TRN 2]

How medicated do you have to stay in order to accept the Orwellian inversion of reality force fed to the public concerning the New Pearl Harbor Day? You're cool with the Warren Commission too, right? Just checking.

It really doesn't matter what any of us think about anything right now. The only thing that matters is that we're all enjoying ourselves whilst rubbing your nose in dogshit.

Keep your head down, Felchie.

You'd like to pretend it doesn't matter, but of course it does. For example, if someone was a straight up Creationist, you'd have to reckon this with whatever else he claimed, right/ And if someone believes the Warren Commission Report, this too tells us important information. It's pretty simple, P-willie. Even a tired old blanket fart like you can understand.