Responsibility

[imhereforyou]

Billy eats spicy food knowing he's allergic
Who's responsible for that?

Ja'Quan gets pulled over for speeding
Who's responsible for that?

Tracy kills her husband while he's sleeping by stabbing him
Who's responsible for that?

I'm not responsible for these things. Neither are you (assuming you're not Billy, Ja'Quan or Tracy that is).
Sure you may have reminded Billy about his allergy, not been texting to slow traffic and make Ja'Quan late or talked Tracy out of her decision, but ultimately, it's not your decision to make.

So why to do many people think it's their place to create rules, laws or condemn people for doing things that have no direct influence over their lives and their eternity?

Is there a legitimate reason, or do people just like controlling others too much?
Or is there another reason?

[imhereforyou]

[Replying to post 20 by 2timothy316]

I'm speaking on the topic, not the person asking the question and have no reason to speak to you about myself personally more so than I have previously. I've also clarified many of the questions asked that I have seen (though I may have missed one or two in the process - if that's the case please specify the item at hand and how that relates to the topic).

I wonder if Jesus ever felt like this - being attacked personally for posing a simple question and asking other to think?

[Elijah John]

You can start by addressing the questions posted by other posters. Youth coupled with your inexperience. It's not an insult just the truth. And though you don't like it is part of the problem with your post thus part of the discussion. Read other peoples post that are scratching their heads trying to figure out what you have against helpful laws ........... So you have had plenty to address but you seem to be more worried about ego. I can move on, can you?

Moderator Final Warning

The comments and warnings you have recieved for this kind of thing do not seem to be having any effect. You have already received one final warning. This one will likely trigger a probation or suspension vote. This post is out of line on several different levels. Condescension, unsolicited advice and personal attack. Once again, stick to the topic, stick to the subject and refrain from personal comments.

Please review the Rules.


______________

Moderator final warnings serve as the last strike towards users. Additional violations will result in a probation vote. Further infractions will lead to banishment. Any challenges or replies to moderator warnings should be made via Private Message to avoid derailing topics.

[2timothy316]

[Replying to post 20 by 2timothy316]
I've also clarified many of the questions asked that I have seen (though I may have missed one or two in the process - if that's the case please specify the item at hand and how that relates to the topic).

My post here viewtopic.php?p=909223#909223
You said,

But alas, many people (Americans specifically) like to sit on their sofas eating their ice cream telling others what to do and why they should do it.

There was never any proof of this statement, though I don't know what you have against Americans or what they have to do with it. I guess I could take that personally but I will not, as I have never made a law of voted for one. I do admit I have had ice cream on my couch. At anyrate,

You said,

So why to do many people think it's their place to create rules, laws or condemn people for doing things that have no direct influence over their lives and their eternity?

To which I said,

There is still the option to live in Somalia, where no one tells them what to do. There has been no real government or general law since 1991. All of this stuff you mentioned, (appointments, bank runs, documents needing completed, dog park visits, dog grooming, car washing - LAUNDRY!!). All of these things are the result of laws. You have a bank because of the laws on banking. There are documents to own property so no one can take it from you. That park you take your to dog is due to tax laws. Be glad that you can love your animals rather than eat them. If you lived in Somalia your pets would be your dinner because large caches of food would most certainly bring thugs in Somalia. There are no supermarkets there. Labor laws keep you clothed with good quality and safe materials.

Americans didn't come up with these laws that benefit us. Some of these laws were made many years before America was even a country. Do you think that Somalia is a good alternative to a place where there are laws?

[imhereforyou]

[Replying to post 23 by 2timothy316]

There was never any proof of this statement(many people (Americans specifically) like to sit on their sofas eating their ice cream telling others what to do and why they should do it), though I don't know what you have against Americans or what they have to do with it.

As an American, I don't have anything against us, though I see it all the time via media, church services, political rallies, etc. I would suspect others have seen them as well (NOTE this isn't only an American thing, but as an American I can only speak generally, of course).

Americans didn't come up with these laws that benefit us.

There's much wrong with this sentence. Americans most often vote for other Americans that come up with such laws. In addition, many people (including Americans) do influence and create laws for various aspects of life.

Some of these laws were made many years before America was even a country.

That was never in question. Though, I'm sure you're aware, many laws have come in place after the founding of the country?

Do you think that Somalia is a good alternative to a place where there are laws?

Never been - don't intend to go. I suppose it depends on what you're looking for.

Now that's over, aren't we each RESPONSIBLE for our own lives, or are we also RESPONSIBLE for the lives of others (in reference to eternal life, as this is a religious forum and not a legal one)?
Which is the topic of the thread

[2timothy316]

Now that's over, aren't we each RESPONSIBLE for our own lives, or are we also RESPONSIBLE for the lives of others (in reference to eternal life, as this is a religious forum and not a legal one)?
Which is the topic of the thread

Until a person isn't responsible for the lives of others. One example is Enron. A company that dropped its responsibility to its clients. Most laws are for our protection from those irresponsible. What else can be done but install a law and then enforce it. That's what happened in 2002, when the Sarbanes-Oxley Act was installed. These were not people on a couch eating ice cream coming up with this law. Which such a law was not the first of it's kind. Laws against scandals have been around since the invention of money.

There are many now and many more everyday not caring about what they should be responsible for. Take abortion for example. Who's responsible for a baby while in it's development? Not the baby. Isn't it's mother and to a smaller degree it's father? If the parents decide to kill the baby because they don't want to be responsible for it, who is going to stand up for the potential person that was put to death? Doesn't a defenseless fetus, baby or child deserve protection even from its irresponsible parents?

Though personally I don't create nor vote for secular abortion laws. I am still under the principle of the Bible and it is my belief that I am responsible to not only my child but to the Creator of all mankind. "We are good lawyers for our mistakes but very good judges for the mistakes of others." Thus when a person wants to kill a baby in the womb they say, 'its not a real person'. Yet when that same person who supports abortion hears of children dying in Syria they are outraged and cry 'something must be done'. This is a hypocritical way of thinking. Of course then you have those that say 'abortion is murder' but then say 'child services should be denied' to that same person, that too is hypocritical thinking.

Since this is the TDD forum then a TDD answer is due. Galatians 6:1-5 says we all carry our own loads. Yet it doesn't stop there. It goes on, when a load becomes a burden we need to seek help and those that come for help we must give it. It also says that we should readjust those heading for a bad step. So who is responsible? We are responsible for the welfare of ourselves and others.

Then we are warned, in Galatians 6:7 "Do not be misled: God is not one to be mocked. For whatever a person is sowing, this he will also reap." So while a person might think they a great lawyer and think they have found some loophole and thus are not responsible for something, that's not their call when it comes for their final judgement. That judgement is not made by men either. We are told, "And he will pay back to each one according to his works; everlasting life to those who are seeking glory and honor and incorruptibleness by endurance in work that is good; however, for those who are contentious and who disobey the truth but obey unrighteousness, there will be wrath and anger." - Romans 2:6, 7.

[2timothy316]

Americans didn't come up with these laws that benefit us.

There's much wrong with this sentence. Americans most often vote for other Americans that come up with such laws. In addition, many people (including Americans) do influence and create laws for various aspects of life.

Example please of a law that you think Americans alone came up with.

[tam]

Peace to you!

[Replying to post 12 by liamconnor]

Again, what is the real question.

I try not to be direct as I've found that encourages thinking outside the box - apologies if I should have been more direct.

I suppose it boils down to this:

Are we not responsible for our own actions?

Yes, we are.

If no, why not?
If so, why do some people try to prevent others from making actions within their own lives (which they would be responsible for)?

Some do so out of love for their brother (we are our brother's keeper... but we are not our brother's master.) Hence, they may warn their brother out of love in the hopes of helping their brother and keeping him from harm.


I suspect that what you are objecting to, are those who attempt to infringe upon others' freedoms.

Including attempting to infringe upon the freedom that we have in Christ, by attempting to place us back under the law. Sort of like those false christians who had infiltrated the early Christians and disciples, spying on them, attempting to limit their freedoms, including attempting to make gentiles get circumcised, etc. There are many who attempt to place others' under their laws (this is not to be confused with God's law - which is love - but rather their own pseudo-forms of the law, with many rules and laws and restrictions). Bad enough that they try to take away people's freedom (in Christ) by placing them under their own 'religious' law; some also attempt to make others who are not of their religion or faith adhere to their religious laws. No adhering to the golden rule there.


They have completely missed the point of what it means to be FREE (especially to be free in Christ). And some (many) are SO jealous of those who ARE free, that they attempt to take away the freedom these ones have.


Making up their own rules; adding more and more laws. Do not smoke; do not watch these movies or listen to that music; dress only a certain way; do not drink; do not hold this job; do not associate with this person or that person; vote this way; do not vote at all; etc. On top of that, there are punishments for failing to adhere to these added rules that come from man, not from Christ and not from God. So that these men not only add rules to take away freedom, they also JUDGE (when Christ said NOT to judge).




Is that more along the lines of what you meant from your OP?


Peace to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[imhereforyou]

[Replying to post 25 by 2timothy316]

One example is Enron. A company that dropped its responsibility to its clients.

Of course a company is responsible to its shareholders, owners, employees, environment, etc. But am I responsible for all the decision Enron made? In a society like the one we have, we're all interconnected to some degree (a person driving a car that get 10 MPG uses more gas than a person whose car get 34 MPG and thus causes gas prices to go up, but at the same time a car that gets 55 MPG might balance that all out in the grand scheme of things).
And for sure (some) laws are good things in a society. But this thread is more speaking about the eternal life of someone rather than their societal repercussions.

Who's responsible for a baby while in it's development? Not the baby. Isn't it's mother and to a smaller degree it's father?

I would agree

If the parents decide to kill the baby because they don't want to be responsible for it, who is going to stand up for the potential person that was put to death?

That's an assumption that someone should based on your belief. Maybe no one else should?

Doesn't a defenseless fetus, baby or child deserve protection even from its irresponsible parents?

I suppose that depends on one's moral compass. Not everyone would agree with this need.

I am still under the principle of the Bible and it is my belief that I am responsible to not only my child but to the Creator of all mankind.

I sure they're appreciative of that! And that's admirable. But like you said, that YOUR belief, and may not be shared by others. Surely, that belief shouldn't be levied against all others' (said generally not directed towards you of course)?

Back when my parents were young, it was taught the bible said inter-racial marriage was wrong - sinful (among many other things we take for granted now). Some people wanted it be be illegal. While that's their belief, shouldn't they be the ones to participate in it? Or is it required for them to make it law for everyone else as well?

[imhereforyou]

Americans didn't come up with these laws that benefit us.

There's much wrong with this sentence. Americans most often vote for other Americans that come up with such laws. In addition, many people (including Americans) do influence and create laws for various aspects of life.

Example please of a law that you think Americans alone came up with.

Explain where I said Americans alone came up with a law.

[imhereforyou]

Peace to you!

[Replying to post 12 by liamconnor]

Again, what is the real question.

I try not to be direct as I've found that encourages thinking outside the box - apologies if I should have been more direct.

I suppose it boils down to this:

Are we not responsible for our own actions?

Yes, we are.

If no, why not?
If so, why do some people try to prevent others from making actions within their own lives (which they would be responsible for)?

Some do so out of love for their brother (we are our brother's keeper... but we are not our brother's master.) Hence, they may warn their brother out of love in the hopes of helping their brother and keeping him from harm.


I suspect that what you are objecting to, are those who attempt to infringe upon others' freedoms.

Including attempting to infringe upon the freedom that we have in Christ, by attempting to place us back under the law. Sort of like those false christians who had infiltrated the early Christians and disciples, spying on them, attempting to limit their freedoms, including attempting to make gentiles get circumcised, etc. There are many who attempt to place others' under their laws (this is not to be confused with God's law - which is love - but rather their own pseudo-forms of the law, with many rules and laws and restrictions). Bad enough that they try to take away people's freedom (in Christ) by placing them under their own 'religious' law; some also attempt to make others who are not of their religion or faith adhere to their religious laws. No adhering to the golden rule there.


They have completely missed the point of what it means to be FREE (especially to be free in Christ). And some (many) are SO jealous of those who ARE free, that they attempt to take away the freedom these ones have.


Making up their own rules; adding more and more laws. Do not smoke; do not watch these movies or listen to that music; dress only a certain way; do not drink; do not hold this job; do not associate with this person or that person; vote this way; do not vote at all; etc. On top of that, there are punishments for failing to adhere to these added rules that come from man, not from Christ and not from God. So that these men not only add rules to take away freedom, they also JUDGE (when Christ said NOT to judge).




Is that more along the lines of what you meant from your OP?


Peace to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

Hence, they may warn their brother out of love in the hopes of helping their brother and keeping him from harm.

I can't speak for everyone, and don't want to try, but I'm fine with warning once - maybe twice.

I suspect that what you are objecting to, are those who attempt to infringe upon others' freedoms.

Basically.

Is that (Making up their own rules; adding more and more laws. Do not smoke; do not watch these movies or listen to that music...)more along the lines of what you meant from your OP?

That's a good list to start with.
Basically, if I alone am responsible for my eternal life, I should be allowed to make my decisions, good, bad, indifferent, that impacts that eternal life without being controlled one way or the other by outside forces.

If I want to drink alcohol, and you (said generally, of course) say it's a sin, that's my choice and I should be held accountable for that choice. Sure, you can tell me "I think you shouldn't do that because it's a sin!" if you'd like, but ultimately, potentially, God will judge me for my drinking not you because it only impacts me (though you may be judged for saying something or not but that's inconsequential to me).
Now if I said "I like to drink and then beat my wife and kids because I'm a drunkard!" then by all means, if you'd like (though your shouldn't be expected to be concerned), take action to make sure I don't hurt someone else. I'll still (potentially) be judged by those actions but it should be my choice because I'm the one being judged about my actions, not you.
Hopefully that makes sense in the larger scheme of things here.