Honorverse ramblings and musings

cthia wrote:This can-o-worms isn't about me. It isn't even about Burdette. It is about the absolute truth of right and wrong in the eyes of the God you serve. Honor made the wrong decision when she chose not to at least isolate Nimitz. She should have divulged her special abilities to Burdette. Even if she wasn't legally required to do so under man's law. She should have come clean because it is the right thing to do in the eyes of God, and all that is pure and clean, under God's laws.

*Snip*

Failing to divulge the nature of all of her blessings under the circumstances is a slight against God. Failing to divulge her abilities when it made the contest NO CONTEST can be closely argued as murder. And that is an unfair situation to put God in. It is unfair and unrighteous to the notion of right and wrong. God being the embodiment of right and wrong. Not a single one of us doubt that the outcome would have been the same if Nimitz had been removed. Honor certainly had no doubts that she was going to kill Burdette. If Nimitz had been removed, then we wouldn't be having this conversation now. And Grayson won't be suffering a blow to their religious beliefs having the conversation later.

If Woman A chooses to get into an all out brawl with Woman B, but Woman A gets her ass beat to within an inch of her life, what do you think the judge will do to Woman B when it is revealed that Woman B is really a man dressed as a woman? Should Woman B have told the truth?

In a nutshell, the God that Honor knows expects the same righteousness. Honor had never let him down before, even at the expense of her own peril.

Why is it unfair and considered cheating when someone who has the ability to count cards cleans out a casino? God gave him the extremely rare savant like mathematical ability? The poor schmuck will be thrown out on his ears, perhaps shot in some cases, even though he was never in danger of killing anyone. Although he was making a killing.

A true Christian should never be accused of setting the bar too low. The eyes of the entire world is on him. He could turn many sinners away. As witnessed by the many posts I've encountered in religious threads massacring the actions of a few - or the one - isolated Christians. Thus incriminating Christians en masse. In this case, Honor's actions can cause a religious stir on Grayson, and that is the true travesty.

Honor's sin is against God, not against man. And this entire can of worms is about Honor's sin against God, therefore the Protector's sin against God, as well as his and any possible future ramifications rendered unto Grayson.

What is the sin? Glad you asked. It isn't so much lying by omission, though that's on the table. It isn't so much exhibiting morally bankrupt tendencies, though that's on the table. It isn't so much introducing infidel behavior as the People's Champion into a religious system of beliefs on a very religious planet. Though that is on the table. Oh no. Each of those transgressions arguably straddle the line of sins against man. I'm more concerned with Honor's sin against God, which is to introduce controversy into his plan. When she didn't need to do. Why would it have been wrong that she isolate Nimitz to remove all later doubt? Doubt of Christians in their God and Tester. Doubt of sinners and infidels galaxy wide for the righteousness of Grayson.

*Snip*

Burdette is portrayed as a loathsome character in the story. Certainly from the screen time we are allotted of him. Much of his troubles can mostly be attributed to that misogynistic miscreant of mayhem Mueller making him and everyone else his patsy, drawing on Burdette's intense and sincere concern for Grayson and his hatred for the handmaiden Harrington as Benjamin's poison. I don't mean to belittle Burdette's transgressions, but through it all, he is always portrayed as devoutly religious and genuinely concerned about the welfare of Grayson. Which brings me to RFC's post included by Vince.

There have been countless atrocities committed by "so called Christians" in the name of God. And many non believers can regurgitate examples on demand. But there are many examples where Christian beliefs saved millions of people. How many were saved from Pharoah along with their bloodline? How many Jews were saved during the Holocaust? How many Negroes during slavery and up to the present? How many native Americans?

How many innocent lives were lost in doing so? For the bigger picture?

I cried reading RFC's post . . .

Flag In Exile, Author's Note wrote:I completed this manuscript in October 1994. At that time, I'd structured the events which occur in Chapter Nineteen because I could think of no more loathsome, despicable, and cowardly act any individual or group of individuals could commit. It is my belief that the sentence "The end justifies the means"—that suppression, repression, and/or murder become somehow acceptable if committed in the name of a "cause" or belief which reduces individuals to expendable pawns—is the vilest of human poisons, and that terrorism, regardless of the terrorist's "cause," is the ultimate act of dehumanization. I did not expect that between the time I wrote this novel and the time it was published a United States citizen in Oklahoma City would demonstrate an even worse contempt for human life and the fundamental values of his own society or prove capable of an act even more despicable than my fictional villains. That some human beings are capable of such atrocities is an inescapable lesson of history. That we cannot allow those acts to go unpunished or extend to those who commit them any shred of respect, whatever the "cause" which motivated them, is a lesson the civilized human community must teach itself.

Do pardon by bold.

If I were to meet the man any time soon, I would hug him for this post. Deep down inside I feel he needs it. I share his point of view completely and I feel his pain. If it cuts him half ass deeply as it does me, it is debilitating. I know for a fact that David Weber believes in God, so this viewpoint doesn't surprise me at all. I would expect nothing less from a true Christian.

Remember what my teachers told me? My uncanny ability to become the character? I became the author when I read that post. Tears. Tears. Tears.

I feel the exact same way. BUT! Where does the line begin and the line end? Bear with me. I can't remember the particular documentary. But it had something to do with our military targeting some very bad individuals. Terrorists. Intel came down the pipeline that several very bad, MOST WANTED terrorists had plans to meet in this particular building in the midst of a civilian neighborhood in another country, of which I forget all of the details. If anyone can remember the details please come forth. The terrorists planned it that way, had a habit of doing so. Our military got the okay to bomb the building, even though there was a 25 % chance of an "unacceptable" number of casualties. I was watching little kids who were about to die. All on satellite. I'm still not over that attack. Why is that okay? The attack was in the name of a cause. Is the difference simply the formal license to kill by the military? A military with the good of an entire country as a cause, America? Why is it wrong for an individual to kill in the name of God, to save a planet? But the navy can murder in the name of its country.

The line is oftentimes blurred. Burdette may have been despicable onscreen. He may have been despicable in person. But he still could have been correct that Grayson is being led down the wrong path.

I suppose what I'm asking is this. When the military is guilty of the same thing, what then? Can not a true man of God be as altruistic as the military? Cannot one good man make a difference?

****** *

Vince wrote:When I asked you to don't lose track of the forest for the trees, and to extend your arguments to their ultimate conclusion, this is the end state if Honor (or Benjamin) had revealed her empathic abilities and Burdette is excused from facing Honor as Protector's Champion, after challenging her: Burdette gets away with murder,, and Honor is ostracized and shunned--at best. Burdette and the rest of the other extreme conservative Keys (Mueller, etc.) can now commit any crime, no matter how heinous, in furtherance of their goals--the ends justifying the means--and get away scot-free by sheltering behind their Key of Steadholdership, crying challenge to the Protector's Justice--the only way a Steadholder can be brought to justice--and not having to face Honor with the Sword of State in her hands in combat.

Is that your preferred outcome? Do you think that outcome is right, or just?

That isn't how I see it at all. Burdette was charged and sentenced. Challenging was his last chance to escape the wrath of the Protector and his Champion and to silence what he felt is the whore of Babylon. Had Honor divulged her specific abilities which made this particular duel grossly unfair and arguably tantamount to murder, it would have justly placed the burden of choice in Burdette's hands, to either withdraw his challenge and accept his original fate or take his chances with Supergirl. He would have had no choice but to continue, but the choice would have been his, made with all of the facts. More importantly, removing any later chance of a scandal of epic proportions brought to Grayson and preserving the integrity of the People's Champion and more importantly the righteousness of Grayson's religious beliefs. Does anyone think any human would challenge Supergirl?

Burdette's criminal history, personality or personal profile has no bearing on whether he is correct that the Protector is leading Grayson astray or whether he should lose his right to challenge. That would smack too much of a Black man having no rights because of his checkered past. Or simply because everyone knows him to be Black. All beside the point of whether he is in the wrong when cornered by Police.

This entire can-o-worms could have been anesthetized had Honor simply did the right thing and isolated Nimitz, removing all doubt. My concern is not for Burdette. It is for the People of Grayson's relationship with their God, as it should be. My concern is not for Honor, it is for the Grayson's relationship with their God, as it should be. It isn't even for Benjamin, but for the Grayson's relationship with their God, as it should be. It is about the salvation of Grayson.

I didn't miss the forest for the trees, nor the jungle for the forest.

The Honor of the Queen, Chapter 20 wrote:“On the contrary,” Mayhew said as the dining room door opened and two uniformed Security men stepped into the anteroom-like entry alcove. He glanced up casually as the newcomers walked towards Captain Fox and a second pair followed them into the dining room. “I expect they’ll be highly beneficial, though it may take some of us a while to—"
Fox frowned as the new arrivals approached him, then relaxed as one of them extended a dispatch case. He reached out to take it . . . and Nimitz suddenly catapulted from his stool with a snarl like tearing canvas.
Honor’s head whipped around as the treecat landed on the back of the Security man closest to her. The guard howled as the treecat’s true-feet sank centimeter-long claws bone-deep into his shoulders, and his howl became a shriek of raw, terrified agony as Nimitz’s uppermost limbs reached around his head and scimitar-clawed fingers buried themselves to the knuckles in his eyes.
Blood and fluids erupted down the shrieking guard’s cheeks, and his hands rose frantically to clutch at his assailant. But his sounds died in a horrible, whistling gurgle as the clawed hand-paws of the treecat’s middle limbs ripped his throat open to the spine.
The dead man crumpled like a felled tree, but the ‘cat was already somersaulting away from him. His rippling snarl rose even higher as he slammed into a second newcomer, all six sets of claws ripping and tearing, and Fox and his men stared at him in horror. They’d been surprised by the length of his sixtycentimeter body when he uncoiled from Honor’s shoulder, but he was narrow and supple as a ferret, and they hadn’t realized he massed over nine kilos of bone and hard muscle. It wasn’t really their fault—Honor had grown so accustomed to his weight over the years that it scarcely even inconvenienced her, and they hadn’t made sufficient allowance for how easily her own Sphinx-bred muscles let her carry him.
Yet whatever their reasoning, they’d dismissed him as a simple pet, without guessing how powerful and well-armed he actually was. Nor had they even suspected his intelligence, and the totally unexpected carnage stunned them. But they were trained bodyguards, responsible for their head of state’s safety, and their hands jerked to their weapons as the beast ran amok.
Captain Fox grabbed the Protector without ceremony, yanking him out of his chair by brute force and throwing him behind him as he went for his own sidearm. Lord Mayhew recoiled as the dead man’s blood splashed the tablecloth and spouted over him, but he, too, reacted with admirable speed. He grabbed both his sisters-in-law, shoved them under the table, and fell across them to protect them with his own body.
Honor saw it all only peripherally. She’d always known Nimitz could feel her emotions, but she’d never knowingly felt his.
This time she did—and as she also felt the emotions of the fresh “Security detachment” through him, she exploded out of her chair. The heel of her hand slammed into the face of the newcomer closest to the Protector, and cartilage crunched horribly as she drove his nose up into his brain—just as his companion dropped the dispatch case, raised his other hand, and fired at pointblank range into Captain Fox’s chest.
The handgun made a whining noise and a sound like an axe sinking into a log, and the Security captain flew backward, his pistol less than half-drawn. His corpse knocked Mayhew to the carpet, and a corner of Honor’s mind cringed as she recognized the sound of an off-world sonic disrupter.
She reached out and caught the killer by the nape of the neck with one hand and reached past him to clamp her other over his gun before he could get a clear shot at Mayhew. She missed the gun but captured his wrist, and he dropped the weapon with a howl of anguish as her fingers squeezed and the hand on his neck yanked him off the floor. His eyes started to roll towards her in disbelief as he hurtled through the air, and then she slammed him back over the table. Dishes flew, crystal shattered, and his eyes bulged, shock become agony as the point of her elbow smashed down. It hit his solar plexus like a hammer, driven by all of her weight and strength, and she whipped away from him, leaving him to die as his lungs and heart forgot to function.
Nimitz’s second victim was down, screaming on the floor as he clutched at the remnants of his face, but there were more whining disrupter shots in the hall—mixed with the single, explosive crack of a regular firearm. A horde of fresh “Security” men charged through the door, all armed with disrupters, and Honor snatched a heavy metal tray from the table. It flew across the room, as accurate as Nimitz’s frisbee but far more deadly, and the leading intruder’s forehead erupted in blood. He went down, tripping the man behind him, tangling them all up briefly, and then the chaos became total as the Protector’s bodyguards suddenly realized who the enemy truly was.
Gunfire thundered across the dining room, bullets crisscrossing with the solid-sound fists of disrupter bolts. Bodies went down on both sides, and aside from the disrupters, there was no way Honor could tell who was friend and who was foe.
But Nimitz was unhampered by any confusion. The high-pitched snarl of his battle cry wailed in her ears as he hurled himself into the face of another assassin like a furry, six-limbed buzz saw. His victim went down shrieking, and the man beside him swung his weapon towards the treecat, but Honor flew across the carpet towards him. Her right leg snapped straight, her boot crunched into his shoulder, breaking it instantly, and a hammer blow crushed his larynx as she came down on top of him.
All the Mayhews’ guards were down now, but so were many of the assassins, and Honor and Nimitz were in among the others. She knew there were too many of them, yet she and Nimitz were all that was left, and they had to keep them bottled up in the entry alcove, away from the Protector and his family, as long as they could.
The killers had known she’d be here, but she was “only” a woman. They were totally unprepared for her size and strength—and training—or the mad whirl of violence that wasn’t a bit like it was on HD. Real martial arts aren’t like that. The first accurate strike to get through unblocked almost always ends in either death or disablement, and when Honor Harrington hit a man, that man went down.
More feet pounded down the hallway and fresh gunfire crackled and whined as Palace Security reacted to the violence, but the remaining assassins were between Honor and the reinforcements. She tucked and rolled, taking the legs out from under two more men, then vaulted to her feet and drove a back-kick squarely into an unguarded face. A disrupter bolt whizzed past her, and iron-hard knuckles crashed into the firer’s throat. Nimitz howled behind her as he took down another victim, and she smashed a man’s knee into a splintered, backward bow with a side-kick. He fired wildly as he went down, killing one of his own companions, and her boot pulped his gun hand as she turned on yet another. She snaked an arm around his neck, pivoted around her own center of balance, and bent explosively, and the crack of snapping vertebrae was like another gunshot as he flew away from her.
Shouts and screams and more shots echoed from the hallway, and the assassins turned on Honor with panicky fury while their rearmost ranks wheeled to confront the reinforcements. Someone thrust a disrupter frantically in her direction, but she took out his gun arm with one chopping hand, cupped the other behind his head, and jerked his face down to meet her driving kneecap. Bone crunched and splintered, blood soaked the knee of her trousers, and she twisted towards a fresh enemy as the real Security people broke through the doorway at last.
A sledgehammer smashed into her face. She heard Nimitz’s shriek of fury and anguish as it hurled her aside, twisting her in midair like a doll, but all she could feel was the pain the pain the pain, and then she crashed down on the side of her face and bounced limply onto her back.
The pain was gone. Only numbness and its memory remained, but her left eye was blind, and her right stared up helplessly as the man who’d shot her raised his disrupter with a snarl. She watched the weapon rise in dreadful slow motion, lining up for the pointblank final shot—and then her killer’s chest exploded.
He fell across her, drenching her in steaming blood, and she turned her head weakly, hovering on the edge of the blackness. The last thing she saw was Benjamin Mayhew and Captain Fox’s autopistol smoking in his hand.

Flag In Exile, Chapter 21, Citizen Admiral Thomas Theisman wrote:The universe, he reflected, was not precisely overrunning with fairness, but it did seem that what went around came around. A point the Committee of Public Safety might want to bear in mind.

Shadow of Freedom wrote:APRIL 1922 POST DIASPORA
“It’s an imperfect universe. Deal with it.”
—Admiral Michelle Henke

Daryl wrote:The best human societies are founded on egalitarianism, with equality of opportunity and no discrimination.
That may not be optimal with a society made up of very different species with very different abilities and outlooks. There may well have to be safeguards to protect all sentient citizens, just as we now have laws to protect the slower witted from con merchants.
As an example, code duello where the challenged gets to choose the weapons would have to be different.

Daryl wrote:The best human societies are founded on egalitarianism, with equality of opportunity and no discrimination.
That may not be optimal with a society made up of very different species with very different abilities and outlooks. There may well have to be safeguards to protect all sentient citizens, just as we now have laws to protect the slower witted from con merchants.
As an example, code duello where the challenged gets to choose the weapons would have to be different.

cthia wrote:Spray paint that thought onto the canvass of a society exclusively founded on religion and righteousness, colored by the current discussion. Burdette's ignorance should have been protected by righteousness. He was still innocent until proven guilty. And the charge of guilt could have been tainted by Satan and his harlot. There is an ongoing war between God and Satan - good and evil. A true Christian should not await secular laws to catch-up with righteousness.

All I know is that honestly, I personally could not have kept the truth from him and lived with myself afterward, sleeping peacefully at night. There must be something intrinsically wrong there, or I wouldn't be too hard on myself, having survived a duel.

My notions, though they have a tendency to be controversial in nature are oftentimes like pulling teeth. Oftentimes you eventually come around. Eventually.

tlb wrote:

Daryl wrote:The best human societies are founded on egalitarianism, with equality of opportunity and no discrimination.
That may not be optimal with a society made up of very different species with very different abilities and outlooks. There may well have to be safeguards to protect all sentient citizens, just as we now have laws to protect the slower witted from con merchants.
As an example, code duello where the challenged gets to choose the weapons would have to be different.

cthia wrote:Spray paint that thought onto the canvass of a society exclusively founded on religion and righteousness, colored by the current discussion. Burdette's ignorance should have been protected by righteousness. He was still innocent until proven guilty. And the charge of guilt could have been tainted by Satan and his harlot. There is an ongoing war between God and Satan - good and evil. A true Christian should not await secular laws to catch-up with righteousness.

All I know is that honestly, I personally could not have kept the truth from him and lived with myself afterward, sleeping peacefully at night. There must be something intrinsically wrong there, or I wouldn't be too hard on myself, having survived a duel.

My notions, though they have a tendency to be controversial in nature are oftentimes like pulling teeth. Oftentimes you eventually come around. Eventually.

I very much doubt that the rules of the dueling code would be changed much: perhaps some limits on the choice of weapon, but the right to choose is already a safeguard to make a challenger think twice. However the code is more likely to change that a little noted, rarely used part of the Constitution; that is more likely to be simply removed.

Burdette may have the right to be considered "innocent, until proved guilty" in a judicial proceeding; but he both rejected a judicial proceeding and admitted to the Protector and his peers that all counts against him were true, except for knowingly causing the death of Reverend Hanks. Had the proof against him been needed, it was a direct confession to Church and the Protector of his armsman, who shot Reverend Hanks; something that was in no way "tainted by Satan and his harlot".

Whatever the truth about the strength of your feelings; that says nothing about the strength of the truth of your assertions.

cthia wrote:Granted. But you are still missing the forest for the trees. The fact that someone else has a notion that inexorably leads to the same fork in the road, is enough to entertain that the mindset of Masadan like dissidents left on Grayson can be riled to conversely sympathize with the accepted outcome of the duel.

My "feelings" from a righteous mindset are simply more fuel for the plaintiffs - other plaintiffs who would likewise also be influenced by righteousness.

cthia wrote:Granted. But you are still missing the forest for the trees. The fact that someone else has a notion that inexorably leads to the same fork in the road, is enough to entertain that the mindset of Masadan like dissidents left on Grayson can be riled to conversely sympathize with the accepted outcome of the duel.

My "feelings" from a righteous mindset are simply more fuel for the plaintiffs - other plaintiffs who would likewise also be influenced by righteousness.

tlb wrote:So anyone acting on Grayson needs to worry about the hypothetical "mindset of Masadan like dissidents left on Grayson"? Since "haters gonna hate, hate, hate" that seems fruitless.

tlb wrote:It is not simply a "duel"; it is a contest to "prove the true will of God" and that would be most strongly believed by those "Masadan like dissidents" to whom you wish to show deference.

tlb wrote:"Masadan like dissidents" do not need your feelings of righteousness to believe that they are righteous; but they are wrong when they act to cause the deaths of others similar to the way Burdette acted.

tlb wrote:Note that Burdette proclaimed his guilt, not just to his peers in the Conclave and to the Protector, but also to all the people on Grayson by way of the holo-vid cameras that rimmed the Spectators' Gallery.

cthia wrote:Granted. But you are still missing the forest for the trees. The fact that someone else has a notion that inexorably leads to the same fork in the road, is enough to entertain that the mindset of Masadan like dissidents left on Grayson can be riled to conversely sympathize with the accepted outcome of the duel.

My "feelings" from a righteous mindset are simply more fuel for the plaintiffs - other plaintiffs who would likewise also be influenced by righteousness.

tlb wrote:So anyone acting on Grayson needs to worry about the hypothetical "mindset of Masadan like dissidents left on Grayson"? Since "haters gonna hate, hate, hate" that seems fruitless.

cthia wrote:In a word, yes. In actuality, Christians need to worry about turning their back on God, bringing down his wrath and appearing to do so. It is the whole charge Burdette is claiming.

tlb wrote:It is not simply a "duel"; it is a contest to "prove the true will of God" and that would be most strongly believed by those "Masadan like dissidents" to whom you wish to show deference.

cthia wrote:My point exactly. It could be argued that the true will of God was tainted by the actions of another, supposedly, believer - Protector Benjamin and his fornicating harlot. Battles are sometimes lost by God, but not the war. IF God had wanted Harrington to lose, does not mean he would have struck down another believer who acted contrary to his wishes beforehand. There is a certain thing called free will that most non Christians do not understand, or rather, can't come to grips with.

tlb wrote:"Masadan like dissidents" do not need your feelings of righteousness to believe that they are righteous; but they are wrong when they act to cause the deaths of others similar to the way Burdette acted.

cthia wrote:Also my point, so why give them even more fuel?

I believe it is wrong as well, yet our own military does the same thing. Or worse.

tlb wrote:Note that Burdette proclaimed his guilt, not just to his peers in the Conclave and to the Protector, but also to all the people on Grayson by way of the holo-vid cameras that rimmed the Spectators' Gallery.

cthia wrote:Again, Burdette claimed only transgressions against man's law, in seeking to uphold God's law and the will of God. He also claimed not to specifically plan to kill kids or Reverend Hanks.

tlb wrote:

Daryl wrote:The best human societies are founded on egalitarianism, with equality of opportunity and no discrimination.
That may not be optimal with a society made up of very different species with very different abilities and outlooks. There may well have to be safeguards to protect all sentient citizens, just as we now have laws to protect the slower witted from con merchants.
As an example, code duello where the challenged gets to choose the weapons would have to be different.

cthia wrote:Spray paint that thought onto the canvass of a society exclusively founded on religion and righteousness, colored by the current discussion. Burdette's ignorance should have been protected by righteousness. He was still innocent until proven guilty. And the charge of guilt could have been tainted by Satan and his harlot. There is an ongoing war between God and Satan - good and evil. A true Christian should not await secular laws to catch-up with righteousness.

All I know is that honestly, I personally could not have kept the truth from him and lived with myself afterward, sleeping peacefully at night. There must be something intrinsically wrong there, or I wouldn't be too hard on myself, having survived a duel.

My notions, though they have a tendency to be controversial in nature are oftentimes like pulling teeth. Oftentimes you eventually come around. Eventually.

I very much doubt that the rules of the dueling code would be changed much: perhaps some limits on the choice of weapon, but the right to choose is already a safeguard to make a challenger think twice. However the code is more likely to change that a little noted, rarely used part of the Constitution; that is more likely to be simply removed.

Burdette may have the right to be considered "innocent, until proved guilty" in a judicial proceeding; but he both rejected a judicial proceeding and admitted to the Protector and his peers that all counts against him were true, except for knowingly causing the death of Reverend Hanks. Had the proof against him been needed, it was a direct confession to Church and the Protector of his armsman, who shot Reverend Hanks; something that was in no way "tainted by Satan and his harlot".

Whatever the truth about the strength of your feelings; that says nothing about the strength of the truth of your assertions.

tlb wrote:I very much doubt that the rules of the dueling code would be changed much: perhaps some limits on the choice of weapon,[1] but the right to choose is already a safeguard to make a challenger think twice.[2]

tlb wrote:However the code is more likely to change that a little noted, rarely used part of the Constitution; that is more likely to be simply removed.

Burdette may have the right to be considered "innocent, until proved guilty" in a judicial proceeding; but he both rejected a judicial proceeding and admitted to the Protector and his peers that all counts against him were true, except for knowingly causing the death of Reverend Hanks.

tlb wrote:Had the proof against him been needed, it was a direct confession to Church and the Protector of his armsman, who shot Reverend Hanks; something that was in no way "tainted by Satan and his harlot".

tlb wrote:Whatever the truth about the strength of your feelings; that says nothing about the strength of the truth of your assertions.

Daryl wrote:The best human societies are founded on egalitarianism, with equality of opportunity and no discrimination.
That may not be optimal with a society made up of very different species with very different abilities and outlooks. There may well have to be safeguards to protect all sentient citizens, just as we now have laws to protect the slower witted from con merchants.
As an example, code duello where the challenged gets to choose the weapons would have to be different.

cthia wrote:Spray paint that thought onto the canvass of a society exclusively founded on religion and righteousness, colored by the current discussion. Burdette's ignorance should have been protected by righteousness. He was still innocent until proven guilty. And the charge of guilt could have been tainted by Satan and his harlot. There is an ongoing war between God and Satan - good and evil. A true Christian should not await secular laws to catch-up with righteousness.

All I know is that honestly, I personally could not have kept the truth from him and lived with myself afterward, sleeping peacefully at night. There must be something intrinsically wrong there, or I wouldn't be too hard on myself, having survived a duel.

My notions, though they have a tendency to be controversial in nature are oftentimes like pulling teeth. Oftentimes you eventually come around. Eventually.

tlb wrote:I very much doubt that the rules of the dueling code would be changed much: perhaps some limits on the choice of weapon, but the right to choose is already a safeguard to make a challenger think twice. However the code is more likely to change that a little noted, rarely used part of the Constitution; that is more likely to be simply removed.

Burdette may have the right to be considered "innocent, until proved guilty" in a judicial proceeding; but he both rejected a judicial proceeding and admitted to the Protector and his peers that all counts against him were true, except for knowingly causing the death of Reverend Hanks. Had the proof against him been needed, it was a direct confession to Church and the Protector of his armsman, who shot Reverend Hanks; something that was in no way "tainted by Satan and his harlot".

Whatever the truth about the strength of your feelings; that says nothing about the strength of the truth of your assertions.

cthia wrote:What about Burdette's right to choose whether to enter into an unacceptably lopsided unrighteous, unfair contest?

tlb wrote:However the code is more likely to change that a little noted, rarely used part of the Constitution; that is more likely to be simply removed.

cthia wrote:Expound?

FIE, chapter 29 wrote:no one had claimed challenge right in over three hundred years!

Burdette may have the right to be considered "innocent, until proved guilty" in a judicial proceeding; but he both rejected a judicial proceeding and admitted to the Protector and his peers that all counts against him were true, except for knowingly causing the death of Reverend Hanks.

cthia wrote:He chose to take it to a higher court. No problem.
Higher court unrighteous, bribed and brainwashed. Problem.
And the kids.

tlb wrote:Had the proof against him been needed, it was a direct confession to Church and the Protector of his armsman, who shot Reverend Hanks; something that was in no way "tainted by Satan and his harlot".

cthia wrote:It was a confession to the transgression against man's laws to the sacristy.

It was an appeal for proper justice to the church. Justice devoid of hidden costs of the price of [un righteousness].

tlb wrote:Whatever the truth about the strength of your feelings; that says nothing about the strength of the truth of your assertions.

cthia wrote:Spoken like a true secular man. It says plenty if I'm right about the condition of my faith.