Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Don't let the potheads ruin freedom
The Prometheus Institute ^ | 9/5/2006 | Editorial

Posted on 09/05/2006 8:16:10 AM PDT by tang0r

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 381-400401-420421-440441-444 last
To: DouglasKC
It's talking about FOOD.

You may think that the exchange starting at Mark 7:5 is talking about food until you come to:

Mark 7:15 There is nothing from without a man, that entering into him can defile him: but the things which come out of him, those are they that defile the man.

This is pretty clear. Note the use of the word "nothing". Note also, by Jesus' clarity about what does defile a man, if that from outside entering into the man kills him, he is still not defiled.

If what Mark records Jesus as saying is true, your entire position regarding cannabis, its effects and Biblical prohibition thereof is false.

Yes I know this event is in more than just this gospel, and the exact thing said a bit different. And the "belly" is used and "the draft" also. Jesus' own words make this merely one of a set.

The lesson is consistent. What defiles the man are the terrible words and deeds that he deliberately does.

Mark 7:21 For from within, out of the heart of men, proceed evil thoughts, adulteries, fornications, murders,

Mark 7:22 Thefts, covetousness, wickedness, deceit, lasciviousness, an evil eye, blasphemy, pride, foolishness:

Mark 7:23 All these evil things come from within, and defile the man.

441 posted on 09/11/2006 7:52:10 PM PDT by William Terrell (Individuals can exist without government but government can't exist without individuals.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 417 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen
"It is not intended to say that these words comprehend that commerce, which is completely internal, which is carried on between man and man in a State, or between different parts of the same State, and which does not extend to or affect other States. Such a power would be inconvenient, and is certainly unnecessary." Gibbons v. Ogden, 22 U.S. 1 (1824)

Subsequent courts have cited that phrase to mean that Congress may intervene when other states ARE affected.

Did any pre-FDR courts commit that logical fallacy?

442 posted on 09/14/2006 6:07:44 AM PDT by Know your rights (The modern enlightened liberal doesn't care what you believe as long as you don't really believe it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 355 | View Replies]

To: Know your rights
"Did any pre-FDR courts commit that logical fallacy?"

What is this? Twenty questions? I addressed your statement and exposed it for the lame personal attack that it was.

443 posted on 09/14/2006 6:41:03 AM PDT by robertpaulsen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 442 | View Replies]

To: robertpaulsen
Did any pre-FDR courts commit that logical fallacy?

What is this? Twenty questions?

Apparently it's dodge-the-question ... and you're well practiced.

I addressed your statement and exposed it for the lame personal attack that it was.

It was a statement of fact, backed by evidence like this.

444 posted on 09/16/2006 1:50:46 PM PDT by Know your rights (The modern enlightened liberal doesn't care what you believe as long as you don't really believe it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 443 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 381-400401-420421-440441-444 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson