(May 7, 2012 at 6:49 pm)Abishalom Wrote: If nobody is getting convicted nor are they receiving said penalty then it is obviously a just law for previously stated reasons. I did not give you a direct answer because you're just being devious. I simply asked for someone to give me examples of the bible teaching us that we are to do bad things. This has been totally ignored by you in your attempt to create this allusion of bigotry. That is why I dismissed your question. You can ride you high horse and follow your "moral compass". Obviously that 'moral compass" tells you absolutely nothing about actually addressing your opponents claims and instead attack your opponent.
If NOBODY is getting convicted, then it's a pointless law. Still doesn't make it just. Do you understand the difference or not? Since the law exists, there is the potential for someone to be convicted of it, no matter how unlikely that may seem to you (and as has been previously mentioned, it does happen in countries today, though never in secular countries bizarrely enough...). I don't care if the punishment requires ten, three or no witnesses, or if the punishment is death, jail, a fine or a slap on the wrist. It shouldn't exist. The fact that this needs to be spelled out for you repeatedly paints you as quite a thick twat.
You can scoff at me having a moral compass all you like, but I don't really see what your point is. I do have one and apply it constantly - you've already proven unable or unwilling to do the same. I don't really see why you're saying I haven't addressed your claims either - coming from somebody who has just admitted to deliberately not giving a direct answer, I find that mildly hilarious. I don't even know what claims you're talking about. I came into the conversation at a point when you were making excuses for the Bible and backed you into a corner because you were trying to avoid admitting your prejudice and I don't like people doing that because it's, to use a word of yours, devious.
