Posted on 03/30/2005 6:01:21 AM PST by Born Conservative
been telling you guys for years how screwed up pinellas county law enforcement and judicial system is.
"...To me, it seems the law was not manipulated to suite one person's aims, but it functioned as it was supposed to."
If you think the parents should have no say and the estranged husband should have complete power then you perhaps have an agenda too. You are strangely selective in what you view as "insensitive".
All it takes is one call to the FDLE they can and will clean it up. They are the real McCoy in Fla. And now you see why they are so desperately needed and why locals will do anything to keep them out.
Just following orders, hum?
I think our peaceful thread is being infiltrated again.
No, they weren't wrong. In fact, that was the exact right thing to do, and that's the reason they did declare independance. They appealed and failed and declared independance. Are people declaring independance from America now?
And, after they declared independance, the fight was brought to them and they defended themselves.
Good point, however,didnt he appeal to the law makers at that time?
And he didn't rescue her so much as pointed out that they were already under the same condemnation.
Amen, Rob. I was appalled when I read the statement from the college as well. Unbelievable.
"No, they weren't wrong. In fact, that was the exact right thing to do, and that's the reason they did declare independance. They appealed and failed and declared independance. Are people declaring independance from America now?
And, after they declared independance, the fight was brought to them and they defended themselves."
I can't disagree with anything you wrote here. Now the Boston Tea Party occurred a couple years before the Declaration of Independence. You threw out Romans 13 to be provacative. Was the Boston Tea Party wrong? Nobody had declared independence yet.
My point is a lot of Christians over the years have invoked Romans 13 as an excuse to do nothing. Good thing our Christian Founding Fathers didn't do that.
Then Peter, filled with the Holy Spirit, said to them: “Rulers and elders of the people! If we are being called to account today for an act of kindness shown to a cripple and are asked how he was healed, then know this, you and all the people of Israel: It is by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified but whom God raised from the dead, that this man stands before you healed. He is ‘the stone you builders rejected, which has become the capstone.’ Salvation is found in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved.”
Acts 4:18-20
Then they called them in again and commanded them not to speak or teach at all in the name of Jesus. But Peter and John replied, “Judge for yourselves whether it is right in God's sight to obey you rather than God. For we cannot help speaking about what we have seen and heard.”
James 2:14-16
What good is it, my brothers, if a man claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save him? Suppose a brother or sister is without clothes and daily food. If one of you says to him, “Go, I wish you well; keep warm and well fed,” but does nothing about his physical needs, what good is it?
Indeed, what good is your Christian faith if you stand by and allow anyone to be starved to death! I commend all those who have been arrested - they have a faith that is shown in their deeds.
He might as well order the hospice painted purple and order the nurses there to wear pink underwear. If he did people would think he was crazy and ignore his order. - and yet when he orders a disabled woman starved to death ....
The founding fathers did the right thing and likely knew Romans 13 by heart. They appealed. They changed the law. The laws in Florida obviously need changing in this area. That's one of the nice things about living in a democratic society, isn't it?
They didn't change the law - they seceeded - exactly like several southern states attempted to do in 1861 - only the "revolution" attempted by the south in 1861 failed. History rewritten by the victors.
This is what I call the "easy bust syndrome".
It's a lot harder to bust real criminals, drug dealers, thieves, murderers but his guy is "real easy" to get. You can ever call backup, use the taser, use the cuffs, it must be great fun for some of the easy busters.
It's a lot harder to take the guy aside and ease him back to safety. That takes "real" police work that obviously is not taught in Pasco or Pinellas counties."
95 posted on 03/30/2005 10:31:17 AM EST by keysguy (Time to get rid of the UN and the ACLU)
That is the absolute truth! These "peace" officers should be ashamed of themselves.
They changed the laws they were under by seceeding and thats the whole just of the term declaration of independance.
Did Jesus ever break a law?
Haven't we done the same?When the lawmakers went against Gods word,did he stop his ministry or healing?Remember,they told him to stop,called him a blasphemer,and charged him with inciting riots. And he didn't rescue her so much as pointed out that they were already under the same condemnation.
He rescued her from a mob willing to stone her to death and from eternity away from him.He told her to,"Go and sin no more".To the mob,"Let he who is without sin cast the first stone."One led to the other,simply by not allowing the law to be used as a method of murder.
let me point this out:
I don't have a problem with anyone going and taking water or whatever to Terri and getting arrested. You want to do that with your churchs name on your back, fine. but don't go saying Jesus told you to, or it's righteous, or that you are doing God's work....or whatever.
Jesus of Nazareth never, ever violated a law. Ever. In fact, He even stated he came to fulfill the law. Never did he break a law in performing a miracle. He never did. "Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar's, and to God the things that are God's." What does that mean if Caesar says "no water for Terri"?
re: the stoning:
Jesus didnt break any laws by pointing out they had sin. The people stoning her stoppped of their own volition. Jesus did not break any laws. He did not grab her and run away. He didnt put a shield over her. They stopped on their own, they didn't have to stop.
So, if your interpretation of Romans 13 is correct, then Stalin and Mao starving/murdering 47 million people was doing the Lord's work.
The problem with the letters written to the Churches (which is what the New Testament is primarily made of) is that they are terribly contradictory.
It is my view that the Word of God is flawless. It is also my view that the Bible was actually written/translated by man. And we are terribly flawed.
But what's with the burglary charge? AFAIK, he never made it up to the building, but even if he had, it wouldn't be burgarly. Trespassing, yes. Perhaps breaking and entering, if the door or window was locked.
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.