CONDEMNATION I - Broken Fountains, Blistered Levees
Upon the prior confessions, the following condemnations presume not to arrogate as one now righteous enough to cast a stone (Jn 8:7), but to humbly and regrettably state facts. However admittedly, subtlety as well humility will be unavoidably set aside for the moment, while sincere apologies for the direct, near-arrogant manner (see Confession IV).
The compulsion to condemn passionately stirs, swells even spills like broken fountains and blistered levees, per endurably observing the endless confiscating thus mass stealing, resulting to the ceaseless warmongering thus mass killing, initiating from the relentless scheming, colluding, envying and begrudging behind politic, militaristic, cronyistic (or fascistic) and socialistic doors thus mass coveting. The larcenous endlessness, murderous ceaselessness and gluttonous relentlessness transgress unethically by disregarding the right to consent or dissent, as well transgress biblically by discarding the scriptures thou shalt not steal (Ex 20:15), thou shalt not kill (Ex 20:13) and thou shalt not covet (Ex 20:17).
Seemingly tangent yet appropriate, if honest self-examination is allowed, then the core motivation for egotistic frustration even self-righteous anger therefore brutish resistance towards this book’s manifesto (if you will) is not solely due to opposing ideas, views or preferences, rather, specifically due to confronting immovable constancy or unavoidable consistency. Categorically, the one actual ethic that may preempt or prevent desirous while injurious actions thereby refute or reject fabulous while presumptuous ideas, illustrious while spurious views as well propitious while avaricious preferences.
Hence an explanation as to why people at large partially or less, marginally embrace or regard the Singular Human Right to Consent or not Consent, by so doing, partially or less, marginally embrace or respect the Human Ability to Reason. For to embrace wholly, consistently is to set aside much invested ideas, views and preferences politically, economically, socially, personally, publicly, domestically, internationally therefore militarily. As such Christian-Americans, along with Other-Americans, whore with Government in a jointly beneficial ménage à trois, thus condemned logically therefore ethically, biblically too as judged by their own religious standards. The moral digression have trended to perhaps irreversible depths, as conditions were (perhaps similar) when the prophet rightly wrote; woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil, that put darkness for light, and light for darkness, that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter (Is 5:20).
---
The compulsion to condemn passionately stirs, swells even spills like broken fountains and blistered levees, per endurably observing the endless confiscating thus mass stealing, resulting to the ceaseless warmongering thus mass killing, initiating from the relentless scheming, colluding, envying and begrudging behind politic, militaristic, cronyistic (or fascistic) and socialistic doors thus mass coveting. The larcenous endlessness, murderous ceaselessness and gluttonous relentlessness transgress unethically by disregarding the right to consent or dissent, as well transgress biblically by discarding the scriptures thou shalt not steal (Ex 20:15), thou shalt not kill (Ex 20:13) and thou shalt not covet (Ex 20:17).
Seemingly tangent yet appropriate, if honest self-examination is allowed, then the core motivation for egotistic frustration even self-righteous anger therefore brutish resistance towards this book’s manifesto (if you will) is not solely due to opposing ideas, views or preferences, rather, specifically due to confronting immovable constancy or unavoidable consistency. Categorically, the one actual ethic that may preempt or prevent desirous while injurious actions thereby refute or reject fabulous while presumptuous ideas, illustrious while spurious views as well propitious while avaricious preferences.
Hence an explanation as to why people at large partially or less, marginally embrace or regard the Singular Human Right to Consent or not Consent, by so doing, partially or less, marginally embrace or respect the Human Ability to Reason. For to embrace wholly, consistently is to set aside much invested ideas, views and preferences politically, economically, socially, personally, publicly, domestically, internationally therefore militarily. As such Christian-Americans, along with Other-Americans, whore with Government in a jointly beneficial ménage à trois, thus condemned logically therefore ethically, biblically too as judged by their own religious standards. The moral digression have trended to perhaps irreversible depths, as conditions were (perhaps similar) when the prophet rightly wrote; woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil, that put darkness for light, and light for darkness, that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter (Is 5:20).
---
Broken fountains and blistered levees, liken Antediluvians
Hence Postdiluvian Isms, while all dead-walk in self-delirium
Insisting, imposing, equally inflicting their preferred Elysium
Till praxeological elisions, lesions by parasitical socio-legions
---
Come let us Reason. Peace is always a Choice.
Copyright © 2016-2018 by D.C. Quillan Stone
No comments:
Post a Comment