By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
sapphi_snake on 14 May 2011
Edit Thread
Porcupine_I said:
sapphi_snake said:
vlad321 said:

I fully agree, and I think the judgement was completely fair. I too use to think that the whole "eye for an eye" was a terrible idea and too barbaric. However after putting some more thought about it. I think "an eye for two" is actually a much better world.

Plus it compeletely defeats the laughable "an eye for an eye makes the whole world blind" because with it the people who don't deserve to be alive will be blind far sooner than any of the others.

Yes, shame on Ghandi for saying something like that (even though seems like it's literally true in this case).

actually the biblical "eye for an eye" was a demand for restraint.

it was supposed to say you should only revenge with the same amount, and not act worse than has been done to you.

I knew that, but I misread the article. Anyways, both the biblical passage and this Sharia Law thing are bad.



"I don't understand how someone could like Tolstoy and Dostoyevsky, but not like Twilight!!!"

"Last book I read was Brokeback Mountain, I just don't have the patience for them unless it's softcore porn."

                                                                               (The Voice of a Generation and Seece)

"If you cant stand the sound of your own voice than dont become a singer !!!!!"

                                                                               (pizzahut451)