18 Jul 05
Originally posted by KellyJayAnti-murder laws predate the bible. and that's a fact.
Laws in general, it can be about dress codes for all I care.
Murder was just an example of a religious law everyone accepts.
Kelly
1850 BC: The Earliest Known Legal Decision
A clay tablet reveals the case, in 1850BC, of the murder of a temple employee by three men. The victim's wife knew of the murder but remained silent. Eventually, the crime came to light and the men and woman were charged with murder. Nine witnesses testified against the men and woman and asked for the death penalty for all four. But the wife had two witnesses which told the court that she had been abused by her husband, that she was not part of the murder and that she was even worse off after her husband's death. The men were executed in front of the victim's house but the woman was spared.
http://www.duhaime.org/Law_museum/hist.aspx#2050bc
18 Jul 05
1 edit
Originally posted by frogstompSo if I find a religion law older, than we must throw out murder
Anti-murder laws predate the bible. and that's a fact.
1850 BC: The Earliest Known Legal Decision
A clay tablet reveals the case, in 1850BC, of the murder of a temple employee by three men. The victim's wife knew of the murder ...[text shortened]... ed.
http://www.duhaime.org/Law_museum/hist.aspx#2050bc
because it is a religious law that should be rejected? I do not
understand you’re thinking here; is it an who rejected it first
that matters? What is the rules on what can be and must be
rejected? Spell it out clearly please!
Kelly
19 Jul 05
it's something that can be reasoned out by anyone that everyone that ever was a member of a family or group. Members of groups don't particular want to be killed so groups enforce a don't kill other members of the group rule. which is why it's murder instead of killing. Killing is the willful taking of a life , even non-human life. murder is killing a group protected person.
Archeologists and Anthropologists have found many examples of prehistoric killing in numbers that indicate tribal warfare but few by comparison that show indications of intra tribal "murder"
19 Jul 05
Originally posted by frogstompThe issue isn't 'murder' it is religous laws you were saying
it's something that can be reasoned out by anyone that everyone that ever was a member of a family or group. Members of groups don't particular want to be killed so groups enforce a don't kill other members of the group rule. which is why it's murder instead of killing. Killing is the willful taking of a life , even non-human life. mu ...[text shortened]... ibal warfare but few by comparison that show indications of intra tribal "murder"
that some laws are bad simply because they are connected to religion.
Kelly
19 Jul 05
1 edit
Originally posted by KellyJayThat is NOT what I said:
The issue isn't 'murder' it is [b]religous laws you were saying
that some laws are bad simply because they are connected to religion.
Kelly[/b]
I said a law based only on a religious belief is unconstitutional. That's what Roe v. Wade was about.
edit,, I didn't raise the murder issue anyway,, I was responding to your claims.
- Joined
- 01 Oct 04
- Moves
- 12095
19 Jul 05
Originally posted by frogstompSo are you saying that all laws such as abortion based on the secular humanism religion are unconstitutional?
That is NOT what I said:
I said a law based only on a religious belief is unconstitutional. That's what Roe v. Wade was about.
edit,, I didn't raise the murder issue anyway,, I was responding to your claims.
19 Jul 05
Originally posted by dj2becker...and presumably I'll see the light.
All you need to do is read the 'Secular Humanist' Manifestos....
I've already read them. Idealistic twaddle.
I'm more interested in how you think than them. Humour me: please explain how secular humanism constitutes a religion.
19 Jul 05
Originally posted by dj2beckerYou "christians" must be the only people in the universe that think thats constitutes a religion.
All you need to do is read the 'Secular Humanist' Manifestos....
The opposite of some "thing" can by no means can be construed as the the "thing".
secular humanism is not a religion no matter how many idiots think it is.
BTW im not a secular humanist and I consider your attempts to call yourself a Christian rather insulting to Christ since you're a Pauline
- Joined
- 01 Oct 04
- Moves
- 12095
19 Jul 05
Originally posted by frogstompWould you humour me and explain to me how the writtings of Paul in any way contradict the words of Christ.
You "christians" must be the only people in the universe that think thats constitutes a religion.
The opposite of some "thing" can by no means can be construed as the the "thing".
secular humanism is not a religion no matter how many idiots think it is.
BTW im not a secular humanist and I consider your attempts to call yourself a Christian rather insulting to Christ since you're a Pauline