Comment: So many things.

(See in situ)


So many things.

Mostly chores, but this present discussion is most welcome among the many things I have an opportunity to do today.

This:

"What if God judges a society, a country, a group of people as well as individuals based upon the morality of that people?"

If you can, please, stand in my shoes a moment on this one. I am closer to death than I have ever been, in years, at this age past half a century, no longer young by many competitive measures, and at this age I am absolutely sure of only one thing. That is where my viewpoint originates, from that one thing that I am absolutely sure about, and all else I can try to reason out, and I can even borrow a Common Law Legal Term for this process of reasoning.

Beyond a reasonable doubt, in my opinion, God punishes life forms that fail to abide by God's Laws.

"What if God judges a society, a country, a group of people as well as individuals based upon the morality of that people?"

I think your question proves to be a true statement as it is my way of thinking, my belief, that God punishes life forms, including human beings, for failing to abide by God's Laws, and therefore it is imperative that those who know better gain the power to overpower those who fail to know better and a case in point is easy enough to prove.

Those who know better than to invent, produce, and abuse Weapons of Mass Destruction, will either overpower those who don't, or we as a species will become extinct by our own destructive few whose obvious goal is to destroy all life on earth.

God will let nature take care of itself, it seems to me.

"What happens when some people burn with sexual lust towards other people in a society?"

Here is where I see a need to distance myself, distance Warren, distance Andrews, distance Tucker, distance Spooner, and distance anyone whose way of thinking is in agreement with that list of people, distance all of us, from this part of this discussion.

If the subject matter is love, then it is love.

If the subject matter is Legal Love, then it is Legal Love.

If the subject matter is lust, then it is not a subject that is on the table for me, Warren, Tucker, Andrews, Spooner, INSTEAD of Legal Love, or Spiritual Love, or Individual Love, unless someone agrees to change the subject.

You are changing the subject, in my opinion, and I can agree to change the subject, with this specific qualification, so as to avoid any potential false connections between this subject and the subject we were on, concerning Tucker, Andrews, Warren, and myself, as far as "Free" is concerned, such as "Free Love" (not Free Lust), in the context of love being free from Legal POWER/FORCE/PUNISHMENT/REWARD/FALSEHOOD etc. NOT "free" from moral conscience, and NOT "free" from consequence paid by the individuals involved in LUST: NOT those accountable for LUST and NOT those having those consequences, those costs, passed onto them by some means of deception, threats, or violence.

_____________________________________________________
My question: What if God judges a society, a country, a group of people as well as individuals based upon the morality of that people?

What happens when some people burn with sexual lust towards other people in a society?

What would happen if there was no fornication or adultry in a society?

What would happen if there was no fornication or adultry in the world?

Would there be trafficking of humans, of women, of little girls, of men, of little boys? Would there be rape? Would there be sexual addiction? Would it take more and more extreme to achieve sexual pleasure?
__________________________________________________

To me, in my way of thinking, I can connect a dot that you may refuse to see, still, whereby a utopian human society where no individual passes on any costs to any other individual, where crime does not pay, not in the least, in such a place the demand for criminals is by that measure null.

What happens when innocent people work very hard to send all their power to a few very evil people and then those evil people figure out ways to spend that POWER on making that process invincible?

Do those few evil people occasionally get caught "human trafficking"?

Did I not show you the Franklin Case?

Did you not listen to John Taylor Gatto describe how "Up for Adoption" worked?

"Would there be trafficking of humans, of women, of little girls, of men, of little boys?"

If the moms and dads work hard all day to pay the most devious pedophiles the most money per incident of depravity upon innocent children, then that constitutes a demand, a handsome reward, for the most depraved human beings to be hired to do what they do best, and then there will be no shortage of that supply, as the message becomes clear to all, over time, be the worst among us, and get paid the most by us.

If you don't see that, then I can try harder to show that to you, as have Warren, Andrews, Tucker, and Spooner. We fail miserably in this case?

"Nevertheless, to avoid fornication, let every man have his own wife, and let every woman have her own husband."

Warren the advocate of lust.

Andrews the free from moral conscience.

Tucker the goat fornicator.

Spooner the ignored.

Where do I fit in?

I spent my life looking for something unknown, then I found 1 person, I've been very close to that 1 person for over 25 years now, and I cannot see life without her being anything but poor destitution and abject wandering in confusion, as it was before I met that one person.

Warren, as far as I know was a monogamous husband, reproducing fine children. I think Andrews also had one wife. I don't know much about Tucker or Spooner and their lives separate from their STANDS against Legal Crime (my term).

If you continue to connect the dot of your version of "free love" which apparently you think is "lust", to those people, and me, despite all the evidence proving otherwise, then you may get the goal you seek, which is to discredit those people, and I?

Note the question mark.

"What might be preemted if that very simple formula were followed?"

Good life? It works for me.

"Is the goal with ararchy to have no laws? Is that what is trying to be achieved?"

No.

A saying goes like this: Anarchy is not "no laws", or no "rules", anarchy is no rulers.

In context of your viewpoint, decidedly spiritual (in a true sense), the concept of anarchy is not to say that there are no rulers at all, but instead the concept is to reject the idea of one Man making man made laws, and enforcing those man made laws upon other people, and this is common sense stuff, since that "Ruler" (so called) can be seen for what that "Ruler" is, each time, every time, without exception, when that "Ruler" exempts himself from the "Rules" that that "Ruler" enforces upon other, selected, people.

Warren spells this out very well, as true authority is what it is, not what it is not.

Joe