Cop Not Indicted

[Oncefallen]

The thing is that Democracy was a dirty word back then because they understood it as mob rules. Meaning the stronger party always wins and rules. So they started calling the system after Benjamin Franklin coined the term republic, but this day and age it is still a democracy. The stronger showing at the poles determine who wins.
If we were under what Franklin called a republic then all our voices would be heard and listened to equally, which they are not and has not for a long time.

Time to go back to World History/US History 101. Both true Democracies (Greece) and Republics (Rome at times) have existed for over 2000 years. Our system of government (originally) was actually a blend of the two with our two house system. The House of Representatives more closely mimics a Democracy and the Senate (originally) more closely mimics a Republic. At it's origins Representatives to the House were elected by the people by vote and Senators were appointed by state Governors.

The one thing I think we can agree on is that our current system is broken due to "influence" purchased by special interests and corporations down both sides of the aisle. All too often elections are won not by merit but money, he who spends the most wins.

 

[kennethcadwell]

You are surely and slowly losing all credibility on CC.

That is your opinion for only to you and maybe three others disagree with what I say.
There is still a lot of others here on CC that agree with what I say, and are constantly given me likes for what I have said. Because what I say is from the bible, not from man installing their own morals and traditions into the words of the bible.

 

[Hoffco]

The more wicked people are and poor, the more the Democrats win. A
rep. or a Demo. government needs, good ,holy, educated people, to represent, and to vote. Love Hoffco

 

[Brainfreeze]

Are you saying that your response to my post is that you do not believe Ro 13:1-2, 4?

" We the people " is the motto in the U.S, meaning WE PUT the government in place.. of course God knows what's going to happen, sin and degeneration did this.. not God .. God is God.. not the authority, if the authority says worship satan.. IM NOT OBEYING.. but I respect Godly authority .. I'm not of the world, doesn't matter to me what they do, I abide by God in righteousness and love despite what the government or bankers want.. Their laws should match up with Gods, if not, not my fault... Interesting how you keep asking question, but give no answers..

 

[kennethcadwell]

No, the Bible only prohibits personal actions of sin, whether by government mandate or personal decision.

1 Timothy 5:22
Lay hands hastily on no man, neither be partaker of other men's sins: keep yourself pure.

If you take and support the sins of others, then you personal sin by making what God said was not acceptable acceptable.
For instance if you support gay marriage, then you are making yourself a liar by telling people it is ok to have a homosexual relationship, when God still says in the NT that it is wrong.
If you support abortion, same situation. You are telling people a lie that something is acceptable now, when God says it is still not.
You can not support laws that are contrary to God, that makes you a partaker in that sin by supporting a lie.

 

[maxwel]

The more wicked people are and poor, the more the Democrats win. A
rep. or a Demo. government needs, good ,holy, educated people, to represent, and to vote. Love Hoffco

Hmmmm... the democrats are wicked.... hmmm.

Well, I would put it this way:
in my opinion, it seems the more relativistic people are (which is inherently illogical), the more they move to the political left.

However, the left and right are both full of humans... humans who are corrupt and fallen.
Both sides are going to have their share of corruption and lies.
That's inevitable... whether we like it or not.

According to the Bible, who sins?
Is it people on the left, or people on right?
It's everyone.
Case closed.

 

[Elin]

Elin: Relevance?

Brainfreeze: this means he has rights just like you " due process " (post #431)

Elin: What due process did he not receive?

Elin: Nothing like minimizing crime. It's about more than just a "single cigarette."

are you saying he deserved what he got here ? and how do you know they were stolen ? Down here in the south, cigs are about 5.00 a pack.. In New York they can sometimes be 15.00 a pack.. are you saying it's impossible for him to get a few cartons from the south and sell them in the north, or are you just unaware of this ?

So the seller was in a position to go to the South to purchase cigarettes?

Elin: First of all, it means they were stolen, for if the seller had purchased them, he would not be selling them for the same price he paid for them, but for a markup, and the buyer would do better buying them at the store. The buyer purchases them from the seller because they are cheaper than the store; i.e., they are stolen.

Again no proof...

Elin: It's all part of the larger problem of theft of property.

Now you just gave this man a new charge.. Kind of slandering .. May God forgive you

Your piety is noted.

Elin: Without knowing the background of the situation, whether the man had already been arrested for selling cigarettes, whether the officer saw him selling them at the time, whether the man was telling the truth in his denial of selling them, you cannot make an informed judgment of the actual situation.

none of this matters that you mentioned.. If he was a violent criminal maybe... But I'm sure that would've came out already on top of all the protest... From what I seen was more then enough to make a righteous judgment.. Cop was wrong here

Right, because it all could have been avoided if the man had raised his hands instead of resisting,
particularly when he knew of his own health condition.

Elin: All that can be done is address the principles involved--enforcement or non-enforcement of the law against theft,

again, THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THEFT... His charge would have been selling a loose cigarette with no license or tax..

And again, it all could have been avoided if he had not resisted and just raised his hands so that no altercation would have been necessary, particularly in light of his own knowledge of his health condition.

 

[Brainfreeze]

28Then Nebuchadnezzar spake, and said, Blessed be the God of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, who hath sent his angel, and delivered his servants that trusted in him, and have changed the king's word, and yielded their bodies, that they might not serve nor worship any god, except their own God. 29Therefore I make a decree, That every people, nation, and language, which speak any thing amiss against the God of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, shall be cut in pieces, and their houses shall be made a dunghill: because there is no other God that can deliver after this sort.


A little food for thought...

 

[kennethcadwell]

" We the people " is the motto in the U.S, meaning WE PUT the government in place.. of course God knows what's going to happen, sin and degeneration did this.. not God .. God is God.. not the authority, if the authority says worship satan.. IM NOT OBEYING.. but I respect Godly authority .. I'm not of the world, doesn't matter to me what they do, I abide by God in righteousness and love despite what the government or bankers want.. Their laws should match up with Gods, if not, not my fault... Interesting how you keep asking question, but give no answers..

Exactly, which is what I have been trying to say all along.
I respect and will follow Godly authority, and if my government from federal down to state level make laws that are Godly then I will follow them gladly.
If however they pass laws to tell me to do something that God says is wrong, I will not obey those laws for the bible says not to obey and follow things contrary to Him.
Why does the bible say and show people going to prison for the word of God, that's right because they obey the word of God over their governing authorities in that area. This shows how misused Romans 13 has been used.

 

[kennethcadwell]

Hmmmm... the democrats are wicked.... hmmm.

Well, I would put it this way:
in my opinion, it seems the more relativistic people are (which is inherently illogical), the more they move to the political left.

However, the left and right are both full of humans... humans who are corrupt and fallen.
Both sides are going to have their share of corruption and lies.
That's inevitable... whether we like it or not.

According to the Bible, who sins?
Is it people on the left, or people on right?
It's everyone.
Case closed.

Yes Democrats and Republicans are both corrupt, and have both been responsible for bad decisions and policies that have run this country down hill. For they are people who are not perfect, and corrupt. We can not say one is more Christian or Godly then the other, to say that is to fall to the bias media reporting and only listening to your candidates side on subjects and completely writing off what the other side says without actually listening to what they said.
For instance throughout this last presidential campaign Romney spent the first part of it talking about how he was going to get rid of the medicade/medicare system then later when he picked his running partner who has publicly said the same thing was called out on this during a debate. They then had backtracked on what they said, and said a new health care system needed to be put in place but they did not have anything set as what they would do yet. Then after Obama got elected some of the Republicans started screaming oh no the medicade/medicare system is going to be done away with. Where did they get that from, for it was their own candidate who wanted to do this at first.
Next the republicans that I have heard on TV keep spouting how the unemployment rate is still bad and at a 36 year low.
I have only heard a couple that has actually came out and said yes the unemployment rate is down, jobs are up, and gas prices are lower than ever for a long time now.

 

[Elin]

Ro 13:1-2, 4 couldn't be any clearer about the Christian's obligation to obey the governing authority because it has been instituted by God, and to rebel against it is to rebel against what God himself has instituted.

You want more control, officers, and government ... I'll take the opposite..

Are you saying that your response to my post above is that
you do not believe Ro 13:1-2, 4?

" We the people " is the motto in the U.S, meaning WE PUT the government in place.. of course God knows what's going to happen, sin and degeneration did this.. not God .. God is God.. not the authority, if the authority says worship satan.. IM NOT OBEYING.. but I respect Godly authority .. I'm not of the world, doesn't matter to me what they do, I abide by God in righteousness and love despite what the government or bankers want.. Their laws should match up with Gods, if not, not my fault...

So is that a "yes" or "no" to my question?

Interesting how you keep asking question, but give no answers..

Is there a question you would like me to answer?

 

[pastac]

That is your opinion for only to you and maybe three others disagree with what I say.
There is still a lot of others here on CC that agree with what I say, and are constantly given me likes for what I have said. Because what I say is from the bible, not from man installing their own morals and traditions into the words of the bible.

I find no issue with credibility only the same passion we all exhibit right or wrong but his words are just as powerful as any other
pastac

 

[Elin]

1 Timothy 5:22
Lay hands hastily on no man, neither be partaker of other men's sins: keep yourself pure.

If you take and support the sins of others,
then you personal sin by making what God said was not acceptable acceptable.
For instance if you support gay marriage, then you are making yourself a liar by telling people it is ok to have a homosexual relationship, when God still says in the NT that it is wrong.
If you support abortion, same situation. You are telling people a lie that something is acceptable now, when God says it is still not.
You can not support laws that are contrary to God, that makes you a partaker in that sin by supporting a lie.

Yes, support of sin is to participate in the sin.

But non-support of a law is lawful, and does not equate to disobedience of a law, which is unlawful.

And I know of no law requiring sinful action by the Christian, thereby requiring him to unlawfully disobey.

 

[Elin]

28Then Nebuchadnezzar spake, and said, Blessed be the God of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, who hath sent his angel, and delivered his servants that trusted in him, and have changed the king's word, and yielded their bodies, that they might not serve nor worship any god, except their own God. 29Therefore I make a decree, That every people, nation, and language, which speak any thing amiss against the God of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, shall be cut in pieces, and their houses shall be made a dunghill: because there is no other God that can deliver after this sort.


A little food for thought...

Yes, they submitted to lawful authority, and left the rest to God.

 

[Brainfreeze]

Yes, they submitted to lawful authority, and left the rest to God.

To submit, would've been to bow before a false god... They refused ... They submitted to God unto death, .. God corrected the problem, they didn't die... " government authority didn't get it's way "

 

[Brainfreeze]

So is that a "yes" or "no" to my question?
if it's righteous yes, if it's sin, no.. like paying for abortions or accepting homo marriage... It's wrong, it's sin

Is there a question you would like me to answer?
I've took note of your responses, none seem to have care or thought.. So I'm good with what's given

Stop washing Romans 13 around like it says to bow and submit to sin, it doesn't and your presumptions are quite offensive..

 

[Elin]

To submit, would've been to bow before a false god... They refused ... They submitted to God unto death, .. God corrected the problem, they didn't die... " government authority didn't get it's way "

I meant they submitted to the government's authority to execute them for disobedience to the law.

 

[Elin]

Elin: So is that a "yes" or "no" to my question?

Brainfreeze: if it's righteous yes, if it's sin, no.. like paying for abortions or accepting homo marriage... It's wrong, it's sin

Is there a question you would like me to answer?

I've took note of your responses, none seem to have care or thought.. So I'm good with what's given

Elin: I try to avoid the subjective and to focus on objective principles.

Stop washing Romans 13 around like it says to bow and submit to sin, it doesn't and your presumptions are quite offensive..

Does anyone assert such of Ro 13?

 

[Brainfreeze]

Elin: Relevance?

Brainfreeze: this means he has rights just like you " due process " (post #431)

Elin: What due process did he not receive?

Maybe you need a definition of Due Process ... Here let me get that for you..
Due process - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Elin]

this means he has rights just like you " due process " (post #431)

What due process did he not receive?

Maybe you need a definition of Due Process ... Here let me get that for you..
Due process - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Thanks.

But what I actually need is that for which I asked.