And once again, I say bullshit.
They will side with whichever condition they believe is true, which is often whichever one they want to be true.
Incorrect. You’re over-analysing.
Over analysing what? That you feel it’s wrong to offer one’s opinions as to a suspect’s guilt or innocent, because that goes against “judge not, lest you be judged.”
You said:
Your opinion is that that before we look at the facts and think that said perp is most likely guilty, we should “look at ourselves”, correct?
Because if that’s not what you meant, then speak up!
-
Dumb idea. Too many rules as it is.
-
Get the quote right. The quote you gave, when given in a non-truncated version is an explicit order TO judge people as long as you’re not a hypocrite.
“1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.
2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again”
Very true, as several recent English libel cases have demonstrated, but why should I give a shit? English court decisions can’t touch me here. Unless I actually go there (which ain’t going to happen), the plaintiff got his judgement, but nothing else that’s enforceable anywhere I live… Screw the bugger!
You might want to come here in a few years time, when we’re no longer a shit hole 