-
Biblical Families is not a dating website. It is a forum to discuss issues relating to marriage and the Bible, and to offer guidance and support, not to find a wife. Click here for more information.
Little can be said for Luxembourg.
Doctors come from the World. Healing comes from Jesus.
I'd rather eat soap than little stones.
You missed it. The operative word there was "occupied". Israel is not against firing missiles into homes that house terrorists, and I am not either. They are against firing missiles into homes that are occupied by innocent civilians, which is why they warn them to get out. When you sympathize with the casualties, you are playing into the hands of the Hamas leaders who are forcing those innocent civilians to stay in the line of fire, which only encourages Hamas to do more of the same. If people like yourself would simply recognize who the real villain is here, they would stop using civilians to try to win sympathy. By telling Israel's government to stop, you are actually encouraging Hamas to do more of the same, because that is what they really want.
You missed the real point...that discredits yours.
It is the nature of governments to lie, and the nature of a government's supporters to justify almost anything.
Fascinating articles on the unequal reporting too.
Taking out an enemy that is intent on harming you, is justifiable though, provided one takes every possible precaution to avoid harming those who are innocent. We sleep well in our beds at night, because of those who are willing to enact violence against those who might otherwise harm us. It's easy to turn your nose upwards towards people around the world, who don't live in the relative safety that we ourselves live under.
A friend of mine once asked me if I thought the guy who delivered mail to a Nazi death camp was guilty of a crime. I had to think about it for a while and came to the realization that even though the mailman didn't carry a gun or kill anyone he was supporting the people who did. Which makes it kind of cloudy when we say someone was innocent because maybe they weren't.
Did he actually know what was going on though? Turn up, walk into an office, deliver mail, walk out, he didn't necessarily see anything.
I get frustrated at all the recent court cases going on for the atrocities the nazis did. Like a guy that was a guard in a tower, and they charged him with all these deaths that happened at the facility he was at (he's like 80 now or something). He was a young guy who was a guard in the army following orders. He didn't kill all those people. If you can arrest people for following orders in the army then everyone is in trouble. Yes, there are war crimes, but then arrest the people who planned it and who gave out the orders, not the minions.
If someone is a getaway driver and the bank robber kills 1 or more people is the driver guilty too? The driver knew what they others were there for and what could happen. But most times that is the person that testifies against the others for a reduced charge.
Has the postal worker lost his vision or sense of smell? How about all the supplies coming in? All those people were sympathizers or controlled by fear.
Just my two cents, but I think a hypothetical morality question like this would at least have some greater semblance of relevancy if we were to move it to something that is actually happening right now in real time that we could potential confirm as being entirely true. We are now separated by 70 years of fog from whatever happened in Nazi death camps, much less what might have been observed by a hypothetical mail carrier or, for example, what might have been hypothetically threatened to have been done to the hypothetical mail carrier.
We don't even know how many individuals were interred in Nazi death camps, much less being able to determine anything close to a realistic number of how many Jews, Gypsys or homosexuals were euthanized in those camps. Because of the sensitive nature of the religious/ethnic/cultural issues surrounding the European Jews, no one has been permitted to question the large numbers asserted without being decried as complete racists, anti-Semites or Nazi sympathizers. And yet, while I was working at Carnegie Mellon in 1986, I helped coordinate a stop there of a traveling debate program between two Jewish individuals related to the Holocaust. One claimed to have been a child in one of the camps when WWII ended; the other provided photos of his parents in a camp, along with their tattoos. The former asserted 6 million Jews killed in camps; the latter asserted that there weren't even 6 million Jews in European countries under German control during WWII, much less that all of them were interred . . . even much less that all of those who were interred were put to death. That man, whose parents had made it out of the camps, doubted that any significant number of Jews were put to death, that their deaths were far outnumbered by the number of military casualties on either side of the conflict -- and he adamantly asserted that the victimology narrative about Jews always being abused has done more to harm his people than if they would just take responsibility for the messes they get themselves in as a people, make adjustments and move on.
I thought he was mean. I thought the little old lady who'd been a camp survivor was much more sympathetic, and the audience certainly sided with her. Jewish students were outraged by the man. But in the aftermath of that I have had to recognize that the little old lady, while emotionally sympathetic, actually offered zip when it came to actual evidence; she could hardly even cite any sources for her numbers, whereas the man cited one resource after another and provided a typed bibliography.
I liken some of this to the current conflagration between woke idealists and the unwoke realists in our country. The woke want to shut up the unwoke, and they do so by demanding that the unwoke bow down to their accusations of bigotry and just being mean and uncouth. The story they tell sounds so sympathetic, and all it takes is outright cowardice to portray oneself as woke.
So how about if we re-frame the question: is the reporter who delivers the news knowing that mercenary activists are purposefully burning down our cities but labels those folks "mostly peaceful protestors" part of the problem? Or should we excuse them when this is all over with because maybe they just didn't realize how destructive their tacit blindness and/or support would turn out to be?
We don't even know how many individuals were interred in Nazi death camps, much less being able to determine anything close to a realistic number of how many Jews, Gypsys or homosexuals were euthanized in those camps. Because of the sensitive nature of the religious/ethnic/cultural issues surrounding the European Jews, no one has been permitted to question the large numbers asserted without being decried as complete racists, anti-Semites or Nazi sympathizers. And yet, while I was working at Carnegie Mellon in 1986, I helped coordinate a stop there of a traveling debate program between two Jewish individuals related to the Holocaust. One claimed to have been a child in one of the camps when WWII ended; the other provided photos of his parents in a camp, along with their tattoos. The former asserted 6 million Jews killed in camps; the latter asserted that there weren't even 6 million Jews in European countries under German control during WWII, much less that all of them were interred . . . even much less that all of those who were interred were put to death. That man, whose parents had made it out of the camps, doubted that any significant number of Jews were put to death, that their deaths were far outnumbered by the number of military casualties on either side of the conflict -- and he adamantly asserted that the victimology narrative about Jews always being abused has done more to harm his people than if they would just take responsibility for the messes they get themselves in as a people, make adjustments and move on.
I thought he was mean. I thought the little old lady who'd been a camp survivor was much more sympathetic, and the audience certainly sided with her. Jewish students were outraged by the man. But in the aftermath of that I have had to recognize that the little old lady, while emotionally sympathetic, actually offered zip when it came to actual evidence; she could hardly even cite any sources for her numbers, whereas the man cited one resource after another and provided a typed bibliography.
I liken some of this to the current conflagration between woke idealists and the unwoke realists in our country. The woke want to shut up the unwoke, and they do so by demanding that the unwoke bow down to their accusations of bigotry and just being mean and uncouth. The story they tell sounds so sympathetic, and all it takes is outright cowardice to portray oneself as woke.
So how about if we re-frame the question: is the reporter who delivers the news knowing that mercenary activists are purposefully burning down our cities but labels those folks "mostly peaceful protestors" part of the problem? Or should we excuse them when this is all over with because maybe they just didn't realize how destructive their tacit blindness and/or support would turn out to be?
The media is providing oxygen to the flames of hate.
Hate makes for good ratings.
Hate also fits the narrative that they think will get the candidate that they want, to win on Election Day.
If I were a mail man, and I knew that the letters that I carried, held orders in them to carry out atrocities, I would have to ensure that those letters never reached their final destination. General mail delivery itself, that might help the camp carry out non-atrocious activities, might have to get held up in order to ensure that takes place, which would for sure endanger my own life and/or livelihood, but that is just the cost of doing the right thing. It is not an excuse to say that if I don't do it, someone else will. What MIGHT be an acceptable justification for staying undercover, is if blowing my cover would prevent me from helping the Allies reach the death camp in time to save lives. I hope I am never in a position to have to make that kind of decision, but that is where prayer and asking God for wisdom, would be the only course of action.
2.7182818284590452353602874713527
I know Heaven lives in me.