RE: Implied BJ on Jesus, atheists support teen.
September 28, 2014 at 1:57 pm
(This post was last modified: September 28, 2014 at 2:07 pm by Brakeman.)
(September 28, 2014 at 1:30 pm)Heywood Wrote:You've got a major reading comprehension problem!(September 28, 2014 at 11:22 am)Brakeman Wrote: The analogy is incorrect. It is not analogous to an personal identity. The jesus image of the stature is known to not exist in that form. We know well that he was not a white European man. We have no unimpeachable evidence that he ever existed at all. A more apt comparison is a flag or other standard.
If a kid performed such an act on a stature that looked nothing like my mother, and I had never met my mother, and I had no rational reason to think my mother even existed at all, then I wouldn't be pushing to punish the kid in any way.
All you are saying is the kid should be punished for desecrating things that you venerate....but if you don't venerate them then the kids should not be punished.
What gives you the right to decide what things should be protected by law from desecration and what shouldn't?
I said nor implied any such thing.
I don't venerate imaginary beings or objects. If everybody on planet earth wishes to piss on my dead body after I'm dead, then more power to them.
If somebody wants to fuck my dead grandma, I'll give you the address to the cemetery. What's the difference in letting some pervert have a way with her verses some disgusting maggots?
Find the cure for Fundementia!