Wicksoman's DOTD 11/21/05 - Clete

Status
Not open for further replies.

wickwoman

New member
Clete in the thread started by Stunrut: “Is Speeding a Sin?” had some very detailed information on what sort of speeding the Bible allows or disallows. Though cars were not yet invented or even conceived of at the time, it seems people like Clete have no problem conveniently justifying their small, non-moral violation of rules they so vehemently insist that everyone else follow. Here’s Clete’s opinion on speeding:

Clete said:
The law does not say, Thou shalt not speed.

It says that if you are caught speeding then police officer who witnessed it can decide whether or not to stop you. He then must decide whether or not to fine you. Then if the judge or prosecutor decides it is in the best interest of the community to lower that fine in order to save the tax payer the expense of a trial he has the authority to do that and whatever that final agreed upon amount is, you can pay right then or they will usually give you as much as an additional 30 days to pay it; it just depends on how broke you tell the judge you are at the moment. And the important point is that as long as you pay it, the authorities simply don't care about how fast you drive. If they did, it wouldn't be up to the discretion of the officer, the prosecutor or the judge as to whether or not you were properly punished for the "crime". And note that this whole time the one who pays the fine has remained completely within the law of the land.

The point here is that speeding laws are arbitrary and they have more to do with revenue for the city or state than anything else. The proof of this is the fact that it is almost universally true that you simply will not be fined or probably even pulled over for doing anything less than 10 mph over the posted speed limit. They don't do it because it cost the city more money to process the payment of your fine than the amount of the fine can cover. As long as you aren't going crazy weaving all over the road and being dangerous, it's not worth their time or effort to stop you. In some cases, city planners actually take this into consideration when deciding what the posted speed limit should be. They intentionally set it lower than they actually expect for the traffic to go! And once again, this can happen because the law states that the fine is triggered at the discretion of the police officer not at the breaking of the speed limit.

So all that to say this: I detect no hint of guilt or of wrong doing at all when I travel at speeds less than 10 mph over the posted speed limit as long as I am not acting as if the road belongs to me and that I'm the only one who exists on the street. If your conscience is clear then there is no sin in your doing the same. However, if you violate your conscience you sin, whether the act itself is actually wrong or not so be careful to examine yourself and then do as God would have you do.

Clete said:
Well there is no 10 mph rule, nor is there a 5 mph rule. It's all entirely up to the cop who caught you. It's arbitrary is the point. As long as you are willing to pay the fine if you get one, then breaking such arbitrary rules is not a moral issue.

And here is my response to a post of Clete’s a little further along in the thread:

Clete said:
All of them that we can. I am not suggesting that we can ignore the speed limit but only that we should keep in mind the context in which the law is passed and enforced. The laws are not intended to keep you from going past 75 mph (in Oklahoma).

Wickwoman said:
Can you point us to the Oklahoma Code section that discusses this grace speed of 5-10 mph over? Strange that they just didn't go ahead and make the speed limit 10 mph higher.

Clete said:
If that were the intent I can guarrantee you that they could make it happen. There are dozens of ways which they could make certain that you do not exceed the posted speed limit. They could install id tags in the state lisence plates that track your location and time you from one point to another and if you've get there too fast it pops out a speeding ticket in the mail. They could require the police to pull over anyone that they ever see doing even 1 mph over the speed limit and fine them $100.00 for ever mile an hour over the limit they were caught driving at. Mechanical failure is no excuse, it should be the responsibility of the driver to maintain his car in propper working order so that the laws of the land will be followed. And there are dozens of other creative ways the government to see to it that you do what they want you to do. But the point is that there is no need for such things.

Wickwoman said:
Or :idea: maybe, just maybe they are busy spending money on crime control and other issues that are more harmful and, though they do want you to follow the laws they don't have the money or manpower to go to this extent.

In fact, every time a law enforcement officer sets up a speed trap to catch speeders, she/he is being taken away from an urban crime area. And the more people that speed, the more officers are needed for speed control. As a result, the police departments nationwide are underfunded and overworked on average. And the reason they don't go after the 5-10 mph over people is just that they lack the manpower and the money.

Clete said:
The fact that this it is even a question whether disobeying the speed limit is a sin is proof by itself that it isn't.

Wickwoman said:
Actually, what it's more proof of, Clete, is that some Christians often conveniently ignore the "simple sins" because its inconvenient to be obedient when it comes to being kind or obeying the speed limit, or showing love to others. However, they are more than happy to point out the "big sin" to those they consider sinners.

What was the wonderful response of the verbose Clete the ultimate “truthsmacker?”


Nothing, zilch, nada.

Congratulations Clete!You get Wickwoman's Dodge of the Day! :first:
 
Last edited:

Turbo

Caped Crusader
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Clete consistently ignored you throughout that thread as he typically does on other threads as well.
 

wickwoman

New member
Turbo said:
Clete consistently ignored you throughout that thread as he typically does on other threads as well.

Turbo, where in the post did I ever say that Clete and I were having a conversation or that we ever have a conversation? You're right, as you said in the unedited post, he does ALWAYS ignore me. What does that matter? It's still a dodge. A consistent dodge, true. But a dodge, nonetheless.
 

Aimiel

New member
wickwoman said:
Turbo, where in the post did I ever say that Clete and I were having a conversation or that we ever have a conversation? You're right, as you said in the unedited post, he does ALWAYS ignore me. What does that matter? It's still a dodge. A consistent dodge, true. But a dodge, nonetheless.
Not at all unlike the way you 'dodge' me, and ignore what I say. Though I should point out that Clete is simply avoiding arguing with someone who won't believe truth when it's handed to her on a silver platter, which is merely a waste of time; and you avoid responding to what I say to you because you simply don't have any arguments against truth. Who's really doing the dodging? :think:
 

wickwoman

New member
Aimiel, perhaps you confuse me not responding to your constant insults with dodging. You see, grown ups just ignore insults. An actual question from you to me, now that would be a much welcomed change!

If you are so sure of Clete's position, perhaps you can answer for him to the original post by me, line by line. I've never seen such a detailed response from you and I would find it quite refreshing.
 

Turbo

Caped Crusader
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
wickwoman said:
Turbo, where in the post did I ever say that Clete and I were having a conversation or that we ever have a conversation?
The way it was formatted made it look that way, but when I looked at it again I saw that I was mistaken and that you were presenting your response to a single post of Clete's. That's why I edited that part out of my post.

You're right, as you said in the unedited post, he does ALWAYS ignore me.
My edited post still says that.

What does that matter? It's still a dodge. A consistent dodge, true. But a dodge, nonetheless.
Yeah, the reason Clete never responds to your posts is because he knows he's no match for your brilliant arguments. You're onto him. :up:

If you want, you can respond to every post he makes on TOL, then the next day start one of these threads to show everyone your brilliant argument that went ignored by Clete. Knock yourself out.
 

Aimiel

New member
wickwoman said:
Aimiel, perhaps you confuse me not responding to your constant insults with dodging. You see, a grown ups just ignores insults. An actual question from you to me, now that would be a much welcomed change of scenary. If you are so sure of Clete's position, perhaps you can answer for him to the original post by me, line by line.
You take what Christians say as 'insults' because it strikes a chord and pricks your conscience. If you feel that what I have said to was aimed at being an insult, I do apologize. I will endeavor to communicate more effectively in the future, without attempts at personal defamation.

I don't speak for Clete, or anyone else; but merely back up God's Word. I do speak for Him, betimes.
 

wickwoman

New member
Turbo, I merely asked some pertinent questions to Clete and he ignored them all. But not before giving me a bad rep w/a message that said NOTHING AT ALL. I didn't pretend to know why Clete was ignoring me nor why you did, but I will continue to push this issue and all future posts of mine that go unanswered.
 

wickwoman

New member
Aimiel said:
You take what Christians say as 'insults' because it strikes a chord and pricks your conscience. If you feel that what I have said to was aimed at being an insult, I do apologize. I will endeavor to communicate more effectively in the future, without attempts at personal defamation.

I don't speak for Clete, or anyone else; but merely back up God's Word. I do speak for Him, betimes.


No, actually, I correspond with Christians here all the time and do not take insult from what they say. However, when one of them posts something like I have the "anti-christ spirit," however, ambiguous that particular phrasing is, I consider it an insult. Perhaps you don't know the difference between insult and adult conversation, Aimiel.
 

Johnny

New member
You guys can justify some really wierd things.

The fact that this it is even a question whether disobeying the speed limit is a sin is proof by itself that it isn't.
Worst logic ever.
 

Aimiel

New member
wickwoman said:
No, actually, I correspond with Christians here all the time and do not take insult from what they say. However, when one of them posts something like I have the "anti-christ spirit," however, ambiguous that particular phrasing is, I consider it an insult.
Maybe you should do something about what spirit you agree with, then, and not consider someone who cares enough about you to tell you the truth to be insulting.
wickwoman said:
Perhaps you don't know the difference between insult and adult conversation, Aimiel.
Maybe you don't realize that taking things personally when they aren't a personal attack is childish. :baby:

Perhaps you're taking exception to truth, since it doesn't live within you. Could that be it? :confused:
 

Turbo

Caped Crusader
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
wickwoman said:
I didn't pretend to know why Clete was ignoring me nor why you did...
By this do you mean that you still don't know why I initially blew off your post? Or do you mean that you didn't know at the time?
 

wickwoman

New member
Turbo said:
By this do you mean that you still don't know why I initially blew off your post? Or do you mean that you didn't know at the time?

It was a reply to your assertion that you believe I think the reason you didn't and Clete didn't answer me was because I stumped you. And I've never tried to give a reason why you or Clete didn't answer.
 

wickwoman

New member
I saw the scripture you posted about answering a fool according to his folly.

I responded to it that it doesn't mean don't answer a fool. It means not to answer him "according to his folly." Which means basically getting on the same level with the fool. But instead you should give a wise answer.
 

Turbo

Caped Crusader
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
wickwoman said:
I saw the scripture you posted about answering a fool according to his folly.

I responded to it that it doesn't mean don't answer a fool. It means not to answer him "according to his folly." Which means basically getting on the same level with the fool. But instead you should give a wise answer.
Did you see and understand what was above that Proverb?

Would it kill you to give a straight answer now and then?

By this do you mean that you still don't know why I initially blew off your post?​
Possible straight answers include "Yes," or "No."
 

fool

Well-known member
Hall of Fame
Turbo said:
Possible straight answers include "Yes," or "No."
Not so fast there Turbo.
Sometimes a question can be loaded in such a manner that yes or no would be incorrect, this is what they mean about " according to his folly".
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top