|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 9/21/2009
Posts: 19,780
Points: 59,346
Location: Helsinki, Finland
|
I think no religion is immune to nuts. Just read this: A Jerusalem rabbinical court recently sentenced a wandering dog to death by stoning. The cruel sentence stemmed from the suspicion that the hound was the reincarnation of a famous secular lawyer, who insulted the court's judges 20 years ago... http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4082843,00.html
I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 10/27/2009
Posts: 629
Points: 1,825
Location: United States
|
Jyrkkä Jätkä wrote:I think no religion is immune to nuts. Just read this: A Jerusalem rabbinical court recently sentenced a wandering dog to death by stoning. The cruel sentence stemmed from the suspicion that the hound was the reincarnation of a famous secular lawyer, who insulted the court's judges 20 years ago... http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4082843,00.html Johnny Chochran perhaps?
"The nearest thing to eternal life we will ever see on this earth is a government program." - Ronald Reagan
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 9/21/2009
Posts: 19,780
Points: 59,346
Location: Helsinki, Finland
|
I didn't know OJ was trialled in Jerusalem Jewish Court. 
I don't know half of you half as well as I should like; and I like less than half of you half as well as you deserve.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 7/6/2010
Posts: 1,214
Points: 3,601
Location: United States
|
Wasn't there a man in India who married his dog or was it a goat? Anyway, seems like an extreme to get rid of stray dogs.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 10/27/2009
Posts: 629
Points: 1,825
Location: United States
|
Wanderer wrote:Wasn't there a man in India who married his dog or was it a goat? Anyway, seems like an extreme to get rid of stray dogs. Yep. Johnny Cochran. 
"The nearest thing to eternal life we will ever see on this earth is a government program." - Ronald Reagan
|
|
Rank: Newbie
Joined: 8/23/2011
Posts: 2
Points: 6
|
Jyrkkä Jätkä wrote:I think no religion is immune to nuts. Just read this: A Jerusalem rabbinical court recently sentenced a wandering dog to death by stoning. The cruel sentence stemmed from the suspicion that the hound was the reincarnation of a famous secular lawyer, who insulted the court's judges 20 years ago... http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4082843,00.html They aren't :)There is a one thing can rule this world - it is truth. Religion isn't truth and so it can't be impeccable.
If you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all...
|
|
Rank: Member
Joined: 4/2/2011
Posts: 70
Points: 210
Location: Woodstock, Georgia, United States
|
Jyrkkä Jätkä wrote:I think no religion is immune to nuts. Just read this: A Jerusalem rabbinical court recently sentenced a wandering dog to death by stoning. The cruel sentence stemmed from the suspicion that the hound was the reincarnation of a famous secular lawyer, who insulted the court's judges 20 years ago... http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4082843,00.html It seems religions have to demonstrate their irrationality from time to time.
Now there's no way you can prove that the universe makes sense, but there's just no fun in living in the universe if it doesn't make sense... -- Asimov
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 6/1/2011
Posts: 987
Points: 1,858
Location: United Kingdom
|
They would choose a dog wouldn't they. In Biblical times the
Jewish people considered dogs unclean, and if you wanted to
really offend some one you called them a dog.
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. Aristotle
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 6/30/2009
Posts: 1,457
Points: 4,228
Location: United States
|
percivalpecksniff wrote:They would choose a dog wouldn't they. In Biblical times the
Jewish people considered dogs unclean, and if you wanted to
really offend some one you called them a dog. That's interesting. Like, just a "dog", or was the female dog considered unclean, I wonder? I sometimes use the expression jerk-dog, synonymous with slime-ball. Was stoning the dog to death worse than choosing a human?
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 6/1/2011
Posts: 987
Points: 1,858
Location: United Kingdom
|
Dog as in male and female.
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. Aristotle
|
|
Rank: Newbie
Joined: 10/22/2010
Posts: 16
Points: 48
Location: United States
|
percivalpecksniff wrote:They would choose a dog wouldn't they. In Biblical times the
Jewish people considered dogs unclean, and if you wanted to
really offend some one you called them a dog. Unclean animals couldn't be eaten, but the Bible never commanded that they be treated cruelly. Something else: camels were unclean, yet Elijah and John the Baptist wore clothes of camels' hair.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 6/1/2011
Posts: 987
Points: 1,858
Location: United Kingdom
|
You are correct Phog, and that was not implied in my posts.
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. Aristotle
|
|
Rank: Newbie
Joined: 10/22/2010
Posts: 16
Points: 48
Location: United States
|
percivalpecksniff wrote:You are correct Phog, and that was not implied in my posts. I didn't mean to ruffle any feathers. By the way, do you know what Caleb's name means? Yet Caleb was a godly man known for wholly following the LORD.
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 6/1/2011
Posts: 987
Points: 1,858
Location: United Kingdom
|
Yes. Caleb means dog. The dog was ceremonially unclean in Israel and Israelites used
it in name calling to denote the lowest of the low. They, it seems, did not use dogs to herd their flock and
ony Job, a non-Israelite, is mentioned as doing such.
Dogs were scavengers around the camp of Israel and in cities and although not mistreated were held in
contempt. Even Goliath, a non-Israelite, yelled out to David becuase he approached with a staff, 'Am I a
dog.'
Mephibosheth when before Dadvid compared himself to a 'dead dog,' just about the lowest condition he could
be in.
Caleb was born in 1553 some forty years before the Law of Moses given in 1513 B.C.E.
It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. Aristotle
|
|
Rank: Advanced Member
Joined: 10/2/2009
Posts: 1,542
Points: 4,693
Location: United States
|
Jyrkkä Jätkä wrote:I think no religion is immune to nuts. Just read this: A Jerusalem rabbinical court recently sentenced a wandering dog to death by stoning. The cruel sentence stemmed from the suspicion that the hound was the reincarnation of a famous secular lawyer, who insulted the court's judges 20 years ago... http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4082843,00.html I remember reading ages ago a story about a king who had a bird sentenced to death. The bird, a hawk, had killed an eagle during a hunt. The king ruled that the lowly hawk had performed an act of regicide by killing the "king of birds" (eagles being higher than hawks in the estimation of "royalty" ascribed to medieval falconry.) Thus, the king had the bird killed for "treason." I suppose when it comes to the ritualistic/symbolic killing of animals religion has it hands down over monarchs, what with the history of animal sacrifice. But we do things like put down animals that are "man-eaters" or who have attacked humans, and most people consider that reasonable. I've heard about pet owners being charged with crimes for the acts committed by their animals. Mostly dogs, but I do remember reading about a guy who kept an ocelot or a lynx or something which attacked somebody and he got arrested. I don't know if animals can really commit crimes, per se. It's really more a matter of the owner's liability, isn't it? A "wild" animal is a public problem, so that should get some sort of public response, which I'm sure plenty of folks like the SPCA and various animal rights groups ("animal rights" always strikes me as oxymoronic) would be happy to take to court.... Stoning an animal certainly seems like a bad idea, though. I don't particularly think that's a horrible thing in and of itself. After all, I'd bludgeon an animal with a rock if I were out in the forest and hungry. The real world is cruel, and it seems to me that the way we kill animals should be measured against reality as much as anythning else. That said, if we're going to kill animals, using rocks to do it seems like it would be somewhere pretty far down on the list of methods just for the sake of how much effort it'd take.
|
|
|
Guest |