High schooler who posted Bible verses in response to pride flags suspended for 'targeting' Gay-Straight Alliance club

Jul 2013
38,923
25,000
On a happy trail
Then let's just accommodate that and do away with ALL criminal and civil law because they all originate from Biblical moral law.
The Bible as written at the behest of an authoritarian Roman Emperor and later an English King merely repeated moral laws stolen from various ancient texts and oral renditions, and wouldn't even demonstrate it believed in it's own set of morals or ethics, by giving credit or citations to those sources..
 
Dec 2015
15,900
11,342
SoCal
There is Roman law:

Roman law, the law of ancient Rome from the time of the founding of the city in 753 BCE until the fall of the Western Empire in the 5th century CE. It remained in use in the Eastern, or Byzantine, Empire until 1453. As a legal system, Roman law has affected the development of law in most of Western civilization as well as in parts of the East. It forms the basis for the law codes of most countries of continental Europe (see civil law) and derivative systems elsewhere.

but I'm sure some of it was incorporated into biblical law.

Roman law
 

Ian Jeffrey

Council Hall
Mar 2013
74,610
43,332
Vulcan, down the street from Darth Vader
Wrong as usual. Those four stalwarts are strict originalists, as ALL SCOTUS justices SHOULD be!
No, they are not (aside from the fact that I named five people rather than four). They are all different. And if by "originalism" you mean to say "original intent," then that ideology makes no sense. The reality is that they all (with the possible exception of Roberts in some cases) rule on ideological bases, even as they complain about the "liberal" justices doing just that. You just hold to your version of "originalism" because you like the outcome, not because there is any merit in the method.
 

Ian Jeffrey

Council Hall
Mar 2013
74,610
43,332
Vulcan, down the street from Darth Vader
Then let's just accommodate that and do away with ALL criminal and civil law because they all originate from Biblical moral law.
That is patently untrue. If that had any validity to it, the Jewish oral Torah - which you would hold does not even exist - would have been used in conjunction with the written Torah.

(Interestingly, though ... once in a while, in reviewing certain aspects of, say, Jewish civil law, I and a retired appellate judge have come across legal principles in the Talmud that are still reflected in today's legal codes. However, simply using the written Torah would not work by itself - something you would not comprehend.)
 
Likes: BitterPill

Ian Jeffrey

Council Hall
Mar 2013
74,610
43,332
Vulcan, down the street from Darth Vader
The Bible as written at the behest of an authoritarian Roman Emperor and later an English King merely repeated moral laws stolen from various ancient texts and oral renditions, and wouldn't even demonstrate it believed in it's own set of morals or ethics, by giving credit or citations to those sources..
This is partially true, but not completely. The various works of the "New Testament" were authored before they were canonized in an Empire that had converted to Xianity (though arguably it worked the other way around). All the KJV did was to replace translations with yet another translation. It did steal the Tanakh from Judaism, of course, but did not translate everything accurately, and by ignoring the oral Torah completely decoupled the meaning of the written Torah from its larger context.
 

Similar Discussions