and you’ll know that I stand entirely for unfettered Freedoms.
—so long as YOUR freedom doesn’t infringe mine, and mine doesn’t infringe yours.
Hold that thought … and we’ll look at the definition of ‘anarchy’—
—and anyone knowing human behaviour will promptly think that ‘anarchy’ is not a good idea. Some people are thieves, others looters and/or murdering rapists, others are religious kooks who’ll do anything to make their god/s supreme (and all others grounds for murder).
Legal murder; it’s hee hoo time again:
HEE HOO HOLDS THE BIGGEST GUN
… … CAN LEGALLY DO NO WRONG
we need objective laws.
It’s a common dream and everyone everywhere bleats along with it—the few exceptions are of course irrelevant unrealistic idealistic Cranks. I too think that laws, good strong laws coupled with the oomph to back ’em up are a good thing.
before I go any further with this it’s time for your ‘prescribed reading’ (in this instance, viewing) after which there will be neither test nor examination but you’ll feel better for it.
Yes … now go get ’em, Tiger:
And tell me in words of one syllable whether you’d rather exist in a system based on objective laws or … … … God’s Laws. (laws revealed to His Chosen by God).
I’m old enough not to care a hoot—by the time God gets elected here in NZ I’ll be gone, and I have no downlines.
So: does the thought of God ruling your own worry you at all?
Why should it? God, as we are often told, is infinitely merciful, all forgiving, all powerful and so compassionate you just wouldn’t believe … the only catch is—
—you have to believe
and believe with no hint of doubt. Definitely no questions.
Your call …
HONI SOIT QUI MAL Y PENSE