On the creation of legal categories such as “murder”

 

 

 

  • Del Hamaker
    Del Hamaker So much for Thou shalt not kill….

    Like · Reply · 1 · 3 hrs
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn
      J R Fibonacci Hunn A better translation is “thou shalt not murder.” There were many wars commanded by God in the Old Testament, plus many other killings (of humans, of livestock, etc), and there were also intentional killing of humans by God, such as the great flood and the plague that God unleashed on the Israelites a few chapters earlier in the Book of Numbers (earlier than the above quote in the beginning of the post).

      Like · Reply · 1 · 59 mins
    • Del Hamaker
      Del Hamaker I agree with the better translation. But flooding a planet is mass murder whichever way you slice it.

    • J R Fibonacci Hunn
      J R Fibonacci Hunn You are correct, indeed. However, “Thou (not me but thou) shalt not commit mass murder without divine permission” is not the same as “I, the Lord God of the Armies of the Israelites, will not exterminate any species or decimate any planets.”

    • Del Hamaker
      Del Hamaker Divine permission or no, murder is murder. One cannot profess to be perfect and then cover up imperfect creations by murdering them without also being a hypocrite. It almost seems as if the great I Am is a sociopath.

    • J R Fibonacci Hunn
      J R Fibonacci Hunn When Abe Lincoln was assassinated, that led to VP Andrew Johnson becoming President. The new President, in an intriguing twist, legally pardoned several of the convicted conspirators in the assassination of Lincoln.

      Murder is not murder until a sequence of government rituals results in the charging of suspect with murder. Until, the ruling is complete, there is only a murder charge, not an official ruling of murder.

      The rituals of investigation, indictment, and criminal prosecution may result in the creation of a ruling of murder. Of course, the TV news broadcast may say “President Lincoln was murdered yesterday,” and, within the context of how they are using the word, that is fine.

      If a government passes a law to create a new rule on whether or not it is “murder” to kill a slave or a Native American or an unborn fetus, that involves another set of rituals. Where do all of these modern government rituals come from? Most come from the Hebrew prophet Noah with the 7th commandment (to supplement the prior 6), which was the commandment to “establish courts of justice” (to quote the popular translation in to English).

    • J R Fibonacci Hunn
      J R Fibonacci Hunn https://www.auburn.edu/~allenkc/noahide.html

      The following are the seven commandments, comprising six negative precepts and one positive. There is much more that remains as explanation and commentary, but this article will limit itself to a few insights after presenting the list itself.
      AUBURN.EDU
    • J R Fibonacci Hunn
      J R Fibonacci Hunn From a 1991 Resolution of the US Congress:

      “[We]….
      designate March 26, 1991, as `Education Day, U.S.A.’.

      Whereas Congress recognizes the historical tradition of ethical values and principles which are the basis of civilized society and upon which our great Nation was founded;

      Whereas these ethical values and principles have been the bedrock of society from the dawn of civilization, when they were known as the Seven Noahide Laws;”

      ….”

    • Del Hamaker
      Del Hamaker I disagree. Murder is murder without other men (and women) I.e. the court system saying it is so.

    • Del Hamaker
      Del Hamaker If I kill someone in cold blood, and no one ever finds out about it, have I still committed murder? Or, if a tree falls in the forest with no one to hear it does it make a sound? Of course it does.

    • J R Fibonacci Hunn
      J R Fibonacci Hunn That is simply a claim that you assert. Your statement would have no authority in a court ritual.

      Even in the case of OJ Simpson, there was no real doubt that the people were murdered. In that sense, “anyone can say that it was a murder.” So, I agree with you in part.

      However, what if a police officer, who was legally performing his duties, killed both OJ’s ex-wife and the innocent bystander, and then that police officer died (so as not to be able to report the lawful killings)? Then, they were actually not “murdered.”

    • J R Fibonacci Hunn
      J R Fibonacci Hunn Murder is a legal category. A cold-blooded killing in a public ritual of human sacrifice as an agent of a government is not legally categorized as murder.

    • Del Hamaker
      Del Hamaker The same could be said of your claims. Since we are speaking of biblical issues, there was no court system when Cain slew Able.

    • J R Fibonacci Hunn
      J R Fibonacci Hunn OJ won the murder case. He lost a civil lawsuit for “unlawful death,” which is not the same legal category.

    • Del Hamaker
      Del Hamaker Legalities be damned. We are not speaking about legalities but the taking of human life.

    • J R Fibonacci Hunn
      J R Fibonacci Hunn I was referencing the language used to reference the taking of human life. “Slay” is one word that fits. So is “murder.”

    • Del Hamaker
      Del Hamaker And yes, human sacrifice, regardless of the perpetrator, would be murder. Writing it down on paper that it isn’t changes nothing.

    • J R Fibonacci Hunn
      J R Fibonacci Hunn If you are calm and interested, you might study the Hebrew texts and note that the slaying of Abel was not referenced as what in English we translate as “a murder.” Different Hebrew words can be used to refer to two similar events so as to emphasize a contrasting element, even though the events may be quite similar.

    • Del Hamaker
      Del Hamaker More writing on paper…

    • J R Fibonacci Hunn
      J R Fibonacci Hunn If you wish to ridicule someone like George Washington because he killed a lot of humans, you might attract some gleeful social validation from other people. I would not be one.

      Writing your ridicules down would not change the words. It is not the speaking of the word “Washington” that made a certain northwestern state in to the state of Washington. What created that tradition (of calling the state “Washington”) was a ritual of a government that was backed by a huge concentration of military capacity.

      The current warlords said “we are naming this state after a prior warlord.” Various tribes may have called the same area by other names. But if you want to send mail through the USPS to that region of the world, it could be useful to identify the state as Washington by the code “WA.”

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: