Not a trap. I disagree with Russ' conclusion concerning blessing of the U.S. by God.
But you don't state your position. Neither do you argue against Russ' stated position.
I consider it an inconsistency in his position. He believes that U.S. laws should line up more with Biblical Law. Does this include the First Amendment to the Constitution or not?
Why didn't you simply ask? Russ' complaints are about recent events, and the amendment you mention isn't recent, so it doesn't look at all to me like he was complaining about it.
What about you? Do you agree with the statements that Russ made in post #40834? Do you feel that I am misunderstanding his position concerning U.S. law?
In spite of all your efforts, I really doubt you or anyone else misunderstands Russ.
"Hypothetically speaking", an "hypothetical entity" could have difficulties understanding what he said. "Hypothetical" entities can have hypothetical trouble understanding anything you can name. The problem is: on what basis could anyone trust the competence of such an "hypothetical entity"?
Besides, I'm more interested in hearing how wonderful a utopia we can fall into under your dream plan, which evidently is
not to follow God's instruction. I am confident you won't be able to produce biblical support for any such position.
If you do agree with Russ' position about aligning U.S. law with Biblical law, what specific things, that are currently legal, do you believe should be made illegal?
I don't disagree with much of what Russ said. I do disagree with Straw Russ. Funny how that works out, ain't it?
In summary, since you're not here advancing a position of your own, or addressing an actual position taken by anyone else, your activities seem analogous to a vandal with a can of spray paint in an art gallery. You're not here to contribute; you're not here to appreciate what others contribute.
