[Looking for Diogenes]

The violation of civil law was brought into the discussion to show that a lawbreaker, at least a habitual one, is not a believer and if they leave then we can let them go. Other instances of abandonment need to be bounced against the totality of scripture. I know that in the light of scripture adultery does not have to be physical, a person can commit adultery in his heart.

What you are saying is fine for churches that wish to dissolve the bonds holy matrimony among their parishoners. But it makes no sense for civil proceedings in a non-religious legal setting. I don't want to see judges reading through the Bible to decide the law. I'm certainly willing to admit that the NH standard is perhaps set too high, but whatever standard is set has to be based on civil, not biblical, principals.

[John O]

I'm certainly willing to admit that the NH standard is perhaps set too high, but whatever standard is set has to be based on civil, not biblical, principals.

All the founding fathers principles were based on the bible. If the Bible was good enough for them to base this government on then it's good enough for us to keep basing this government on.

We started getting in trouble (socially and culturally) when we strayed from biblically correct law.