“You asked if I could see the same nonexistent moral quandary that you see in God’s commandment not to murder.”
I did not ask this.
“Throwing in a strawman asking me to speculate about your limited capacity for charity does nothing to address the issue at hand. “
This is not what I asked.
“Yes, I do think that some people are limited in their willingness to be charitable. “
Not what I asked.
“I still don’t think there should be a death penalty for failure to pay a debt.”
With whom do you disagree about this? It is not me.
“And I still don’t see how your approach to limiting charity could ever justify such a position.”
What approach did I advocate? I don’t recall advocating for anything.
Again, you need to be honest in your discussion, otherwise you are arguing with yourself.
Honesty....you had a fleeting brush with it last night, but I see a nights rest has you returning to your previous dishonesty on this discussion
If you wish to debate me, don’t debate yourself. If you just wish to debate yourself, have at it - but don’t include me - I can’t participate.
You two should pair off. Neither of you can stand by your own long held position against the right to life. You poke at it, drop your little turds in the punchbowl, then swear you didn’t mean anything by it. Until you can come out in the open and admit what you’re pushing, nobody will ever take you seriously. You deserve each other.