http://slog.thestranger.com/slog/archives/2012/11/11/slog-bible-study-matthew-534-37 Comments On: Slog Bible Study: Matthew 5:34-37 by Goldy en-us Copyright 2013 The Stranger. All rights reserved. This RSS file is offered to individuals, The Stranger readers, and non-commercial organizations only. Any commercial websites wishing to use this RSS file, please contact The Stranger. webmaster@thestranger.com (The Stranger Webmaster) Wed, 22 May 2013 00:00:01 -0700 Wed, 22 May 2013 02:15:00 -0700 Foundation http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss
Look, I believe that everything and everyone should have to put up with being question and/or criticized, because that's the only way to find truth, any truth, be it personal, universal, scientific, spiritual, emotional or any other kind.

I also believe that your argument to criticize someone because a completely different someone is being a dick is stupid.

(for the record I am not atheist, not affiliated with any particular religion)
Posted by Friendstastegood]]> Wed, 14 Nov 2012 09:16:19 -0800 The Stranger
Doh!!!
Posted by subwlf]]> Mon, 12 Nov 2012 10:25:24 -0800 The Stranger
I affirm, mainly because I agree with Rex Stout's character Nero Wolfe: "If my personal word is no good, my sworn oath will be no better."


Posted by DonServo]]> Sun, 11 Nov 2012 18:55:54 -0800 The Stranger
Common law comes originally from Germanic traditions, the same ones that used ordeals to try guilt. Legal disputes were often settled not through evidence and fact finding, but by asking participants to take an oath swearing that their story was true. They'd produce a prescribed number of "oath-helpers", who weren't witnesses to events in dispute, but rather asserted the trustworthiness of the person taking the oath.

That's not to say that Christianity didn't influence further developments, but fundamentally, the Common Law has pagan roots.
Posted by Corydon]]> Sun, 11 Nov 2012 18:16:25 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Brooklyn Reader]]> Sun, 11 Nov 2012 17:01:07 -0800 The Stranger
Everything to which I had supposedly pledged, sworn to, or promised before (the flag, the Scout oath, jury duty, and pretty much everything I'd ever mumbled in church) suddenly seemed really, really insignificant.
Posted by bleedingheartlibertarian]]> Sun, 11 Nov 2012 16:08:01 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Gerald Fnord]]> Sun, 11 Nov 2012 15:58:18 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Brooklyn Reader]]> Sun, 11 Nov 2012 15:55:25 -0800 The Stranger
Posted by Gerald Fnord]]> Sun, 11 Nov 2012 15:23:37 -0800 The Stranger Posted by isalang]]> Sun, 11 Nov 2012 15:22:03 -0800 The Stranger
And it is this very justification, this attempt to impose your private beliefs upon the rest of us who do not share them, that makes you and your fellow believers subject to critique. Those who cannot tolerate dissent should not expect to be treated with kid gloves. Your religion, your spirituality, your belief system, all of these are just as worthy of examination as any other aspect of life. Particularly if you are to use them as justification for influencing the laws that govern all of us, including those of us who disagree with your interpretation of the world.

Posted by Tacoma Traveler]]> Sun, 11 Nov 2012 14:16:23 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Phoebe in Wallingford]]> Sun, 11 Nov 2012 13:17:01 -0800 The Stranger Posted by venomlash]]> Sun, 11 Nov 2012 13:12:58 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Lymis]]> Sun, 11 Nov 2012 13:09:20 -0800 The Stranger Posted by briantrice]]> Sun, 11 Nov 2012 12:58:32 -0800 The Stranger
Spiritual people have lately been at the forefront of not only criticizing the fulfillment of others, but also have attempted to restrict that fulfillment through the force of law. In so doing, they have opened themselves up for critique, under the principle that what's good for the goose is good for the gander.

In fact, given that the major assault on individual fulfillment by the religious has been leveled at people whose fulfillment is programmed into their DNA, such as GLBT people, and since religion is a choice rather than an inherent characteristic, spiritual fulfillment is even more worthy or criticism than the people they have so viciously attacked.

Once having judged, one is subject to judgement. Arguments to the contrary will fall on the deaf ears of those you have harmed in the past. Be grateful that we whom you have attacked previously have not resorted to the same abuse of our legal system as you have, and have not attempted to render you illegal as you have attempted to render us.
Posted by Tacoma Traveler]]> Sun, 11 Nov 2012 12:54:02 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Phoebe in Wallingford]]> Sun, 11 Nov 2012 12:40:26 -0800 The Stranger
Posted by rainbird]]> Sun, 11 Nov 2012 11:02:30 -0800 The Stranger Posted by monkey]]> Sun, 11 Nov 2012 11:00:10 -0800 The Stranger
Yes, Mormons are strange motherfuckers. But I don't want to hear christians who sit in pews and symbolically eat a dead guy's flesh and drink his blood (ritual cannibalism?) talk to me about other people's weirdness. I'll listen to that from an atheist, but not from somebody who hangs a gigantic representation of an Ancient Roman version of the electric chair on a wall only to tell me he follows a religion of life.
Posted by Tacoma Traveler]]> Sun, 11 Nov 2012 10:44:54 -0800 The Stranger Posted by rainbird]]> Sun, 11 Nov 2012 10:24:12 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Goldy]]> Sun, 11 Nov 2012 10:19:14 -0800 The Stranger Posted by Fifty-Two-Eighty]]> Sun, 11 Nov 2012 10:07:17 -0800 The Stranger
An injunction against oath taking has its merits, in that societies create these paradoxes.
Posted by Tacoma Traveler]]> Sun, 11 Nov 2012 10:06:26 -0800 The Stranger Posted by zombie eyes]]> Sun, 11 Nov 2012 09:57:40 -0800 The Stranger