"When Trump demeans and assaults women, I consider it flat out blasphemy" ( #ChristianWomenPreach )

[Igel]

1. That can be said about anybody.

Meaning that any dissing of men, boys, girls, women she should also consider blasphemy. They were also created by God, God loves them, and their hopes and dreams are sacred. Except that I suspect that many of those hopes and dreams she'd considered to be blasphemy. Because, well, they are. We can't expect consistency when it's about something so personal. God is personal. A veritable pokegah. Take out the pokeball, "God! Kill them with your kindness attack!" By which is not meant actual kindness.

Or she views women as somehow more sacred, more worthy. Just because they are women. Genitals matter, in other words, and we're not really created equal.

It's not a question of if she's wrong, it's a question of where and to what extent.

Which has been my assumption about pretty much everybody at Union TS since the early '80s. They and I seldom see eye to eye on the reasons for any belief, value, or ideological stance, even when we agree on the basic underlying morality. One will surprise me with some argument, but then, on page 2 or 3, I'm disabused of my perception that we're in agreement.

"Considering the context of this verse, and erasing what's been written and searching carefully all the interstices to ascertain what we should understand this to mean, it's clear that the only possible meaning of the word 'not' in this verse must not be to indicate prohibition, but to indicate not just assent but the obligation to do what is on the surface prohibited, with the further clarification that this verse is speaking directly to the provision proposed by Senator so-and-so in SB 10353, after we discussed it over wine and cheese at the reception after his victory party."

Meh.