Anyone who TIES SOMEONE UP AND FORCES THEM TO DO STUFF is a fuckface.

[Hello_Kitty]

I don't care how old he was.

The end.

[RandomThoughts]

1. So then you believe in no prisons at all?

Although I agree who is in a prison should be based on best social decisions from representative democracy of the governed.

And also know that false arrest is a serious issue, since some wannabes did that to me using smear and deception, also why it has to be done with compassion and honesty to avoid false arrests.

[Hello_Kitty]

3. Yeah, that really applies to Rand Paul's situation. eom

[RandomThoughts]

7. I thought Ron Paul story was him commenting on a verse, in some kind of code actually

I really don't know what the Ron Paul story is, but I would guess it has something to do with that verse, although it sounds really messed up.

Mark 3
" 23So Jesus called them and spoke to them in parables: "How can Satan drive out Satan? 24If a kingdom is divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand. 25If a house is divided against itself, that house cannot stand. 26And if Satan opposes himself and is divided, he cannot stand; his end has come. 27In fact, no one can enter a strong man's house and carry off his possessions unless he first ties up the strong man. Then he can rob his house. 28I tell you the truth, all the sins and blasphemies of men will be forgiven them. 29But whoever blasphemes against the Holy Spirit will never be forgiven; he is guilty of an eternal sin."

That is why I do not claim to know for sure if what I post is of better or worse thoughts, nor do I claim the source of inspiration, although I personally believe it is in many places, but not all, I don't make that claim for that reason. I say each person has to decide. Although it is possible to find better thoughts in most things, but it is still each persons choice of how they hear it.

It should be noted, anyone that says someone is blaspheming against the Holy Spirit, may be doing the same thing by claiming to know what is and isn't of the Holy Spirit. Then again, they may not be.

:shrug:


I find many really great things in many places, but I don't tell people what they come from, but do have my own best thoughts of where they come from. Also why I stress the idea of not telling other people if they are of good or bad. Although I have my own view of those things.


LOL, people that think 'binding the strong man' has anything to do with material probably doesn't understand the spiritual meaning. So someone in a prison like many activist over the years, and even the same people that wrote those books, would be bound by material, but not spiritual, as an example.

The other funny part of that post is the obvious prompt of that verse, since There are other comments of strength that are not in that context. And I posted getting stronger earlier. So some would comment on 'strong' as a label wrongly.

This is actually where Highlander doctrine in part comes from. However I don't take from people, nor allow things to be taken from me, they can't be, because they are where nobody can take them. Note I don't believe in Highlander doctrine, it is not my style to think that people are here to take from each other, even those verses are more about explaining the other doctrine more then anything else, in my view.

Luke 11
17Jesus knew their thoughts and said to them: "Any kingdom divided against itself will be ruined, and a house divided against itself will fall. 18If Satan is divided against himself, how can his kingdom stand? I say this because you claim that I drive out demons by Beelzebub. 19Now if I drive out demons by Beelzebub, by whom do your followers drive them out? So then, they will be your judges. 20But if I drive out demons by the finger of God, then the kingdom of God has come to you.

21"When a strong man, fully armed, guards his own house, his possessions are safe. 22But when someone stronger attacks and overpowers him, he takes away the armor in which the man trusted and divides up the spoils.


:shrug: So I was thinking his comment was about something else. Or he was mixed up if he did that for some material reason, my guess is he was doing a ritual based on those verses, but not of my belief, if he did those things. Or someone made up the story or added to it to do that to him.

Don't really know.


And I will have beer and travel money and many experiences. :)


I really think that concept, and people believing it is about stealing from each other is much of the problems. I think a person should be able to defend their argument and from that get what is due to them. And I believe that will be the case based on how people choose to judge others also.

[ljm2002]

10. Hm, I had not heard about that...

...maybe you could provide a link where prisoners are tied up and forced to do things.

I mean maybe there are cases where that happens; however, what I want from you is some indication that this is a legitimate thing to do to prisoners.

Betcha can't.

[RandomThoughts]

11. I was not defending the comment.

I was looking at the metaphor towards society in the first post, where people use prisons to tie up people in the material.


Then in the second post was looking at it from the spiritual.


As far as your question, every time you show someone a contradiction they have in their own thoughts, they get tied up, that tying up is in part from themselves, and a view that is not of the best. Conflicting with a view that is of the best.

It is very easy to tie things up, just show them how they are a contradiction to themselves.


Hence why resolving contradictions is so important. Although I would not make anyone do anything, that would be wrong, and theft of free will, not something I believe in.




And if you think you steal by using someones ideas, then you do not see the connecting force lines in ideas that lead, if a person chooses, to the stealers vaults.

Side note, you lost your betcha, pay up :)

[ljm2002]

17. While I appreciate your response...

...I do not agree that you I lost my betcha :-)

You have not demonstrated that it is okay to tie up prisoners and make them do stuff.

Well, we all know they can make prisoners do stuff. But it's the tying them up part that is not really a legal way to go about it.

The OP was referring to a specific incident, not a metaphorical incident, where Rand Paul is reputed to have actually tied up a young woman and forced her to do things she did not want to do. Your response said "So, you're against all prisons, eh?" (paraphrasing) It was a non sequitur.

[RandomThoughts]

19. There is a contextual disagreement in the syntax of the conversation.

Your claim to the OP meaning depends on an assumption of context.

But if you want a material context.

My first comment was expanding his libertarian views of everyone making laws for themselves, versus societal laws.

It makes complete sense that he would want to physically tie up a women, in the same concept as private sector owning prisons, dictated by some value of money.

A libertarian believes exactly that, and money owned prisons, or no democracy in society is the exact same thing as what he did, any person with the power to do something doing it.

He had the ability to tie her up, so he did it. A person with money, without government and laws, can tie up a peasant, in the same way, libertarian views would allow them to make people do many things by threat of loss of wages, food, or health care also.

It completely fits his libertarian views.

But if you ask is it ok to tie someone up, that would depend on what they are doing based on some view of what is correct or wrong, hence why I think if someone is to be tied up, they should tie themselves up with there own contradictions.

Although in society, there are sets of rules were people are tied up 'prisons' and then made to do things. And as I said I think that should be by best representative government, not only what you can do.


Then there are different concepts on that idea in the spiritual. So weather spiritual or material there are explanations.

[Ian David]

2. Unless they have a safeword. n/t

[Hello_Kitty]

4. Sure, if it's consensual roleplay. What Rand Paul did wasn't. eom

[lightningandsnow]

5. I was going to say that.

Safe, sane, and consensual is where it's at.

[lightningandsnow]

6. Rand Paul is a shitcock.

[cliffordu]

8. I dunno -

Kind of an insult to shitcocks everywhere, ain't it??

[McCamy Taylor]

9. Isn't Rand a doctor? Who would want to see a doctor who did that

[JTFrog]

12. "a self certified ophthalmologist"

:rofl:
:rofl:
:rofl:

[Coexist]

13. best. line. of the debate

[and-justice-for-all]

14. Some people are in to that...

As long as the people involved are ok with it, then there is no issue.

[Hello_Kitty]

15. Jesus Fuck, that has already been addressed and consensual BDSM has fuck all to do this. eom

[and-justice-for-all]

22. Jesus Fuck?? LOL

Anything other than consenual BDSM is torture/assault/battery and he should be in jail and not running for office.

and it would be helpful is you posted the link to what the fuck your referring too.

[WonderGrunion]

16. Wonder Woman takes issue with what you called her

:hide:

[bullwinkle428]

18. THANK. YOU!!

:applause:

[librechik]

20. now he wants top force America to give up its social security and minimum wage laws

He's a fascist period.

[BuelahWitch]

21. What happened?

:shrug: I know about the Joe Miller handcuff incident, now Rand Paul is tying people up? :shrug: