Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (244182)	7/30/2005 8:49:15 AM
From: Alighieri	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1571808

"Pre-emptive violence" might be justified if it is necessary to stop a known criminal from hurting anyone else. According to Jesus, "thou shalt not kill" also includes being angry with someone else, but it's not clear whether the commandment includes killing in self-defense or the defense of others. Being a student of martial arts, I asked a pastor about this, and he said that it's up to each and every single person to decide this, and only after a lot of prayer. As for social inequality, well, the Bible has always made it clear that there will always be social inequality, especially when certain verses gives different commands to "masters" and "slaves." Ultimately, it's up to God to decide who gets to be rich and who gets to be poor, and who wins the lottery of life and who gets dealt a bad hand. That doesn't make social inequality OK, IMO, nor does it mean the poor are "predestined" to stay poor and likewise for the rich. But it does assign proper roles and responsibilities for each and every servant of God in all walks of life, from the POTUS to a guy in jail. It seems to me that you cherry pick through the bible to find lesser prominent passages that rationalize events that don't quite fit its main line teachings. Turning the other cheek is the extreme opposite end of pre-emption. Is "pre-emptive violence" really the only way, or is it a choice borne out of a lack of faith in God's judgement? I think it's neither...what do you think? Al

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (244182)	7/30/2005 1:54:17 PM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1571808

Ultimately, it's up to God to decide who gets to be rich and who gets to be poor, and who wins the lottery of life and who gets dealt a bad hand. I believe in free will; that you are dealt a hand and then you can go either way with it. From the above, it sounds like you think everything is pre-ordained. ted

To: Tenchusatsu who wrote (244182)	7/30/2005 3:08:03 PM
From: Road Walker	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1571808

re: "Pre-emptive violence" might be justified if it is necessary to stop a known criminal from hurting anyone else. According to Jesus, "thou shalt not kill" also includes being angry with someone else, but it's not clear whether the commandment includes killing in self-defense or the defense of others. I suppose if you were a strict Bible constructionist (as in Constitution constructionist) then "thou shalt not kill" means thou shalt not kill. The rest is "nuance", "I supported killing in Iraq before I didn't support killing in Iraq". Does Jesus forgive "nuance"? Your religion seems filled with "nuance", while your politics are clear cut.