I thoroughly detest The Donald...but he has my v**e in November. There is no other choice, I feel. Hillary is the same old same old plus socialism on a scale that will overwhelm America as a Republic. The Donald could be our introduction to a f*****t dictatorship and all out race war, but the Right under him will finally get to see--in vivid and, probably, bloody detail--how wrong-headed they are on so many issues. The Tea Party is an enemy of the State. The Donald, if elected, will prove this to be true.

Yet this is not cut and dry. He could be great. Just what this country needs at this time. We need something right now, and that's for sure. A radical change. How are you handling who to v**e for in November? Any hints as how best to whittle down the choice?

Sorry, why did she not pin those who supported what she said? Why was the supposed negativity worth saving? Why was an example of "how not to behave" motivation to run away? I am confused. Did you both talk about this issue? How does a "very bright young girl of 16" allow herself to be defeated, become a victim, over a disagreement in views? "Very bright" suggests to me an emotional maturity as well as intelligence. From your description of your daughter, it would seem she could handle herself. Did you forewarn her of what might be trolls? Before she decided to quit, did you talk over that decision? I apologize again but some pertinent facts seem to be missing.

Thank you. Your post gave me a lot to think about. I grew up under the aegis of take nothing from nobody. Give them as much as you get. Then this thought came: where does it end? It is not my intent to disagree with you; what you offer as a solution, well not exactly a solution but a perpetual cycle of reprisals that could work only when one finally tires of the game. But a lot can go very wrong in between. Too often, it is the one who takes offense that does far more damage than the one who initially gave offense. And it escalates, slowly or quickly. Why not tire early? Why give energy to the other we really want nothing to do with? What changed my thinking was reading this story about two friends in the city and one stops to buy a paper. The paper vendor in the kiosk is a miserable son of a b***h and makes some mean-spirited comments to the man. He simply responds, "Thank you. Have a nice day." A few steps later his friend asks, "Why did you let that guy get away with insulting you?" The other responds, "Why should I allow him to ruin my day."

Taking offense gives power to the offender. "Standing up" to them puts us under their thumb, it d**gs us down. Ignoring the detractors frees us and makes them the fool. We lose freedom of association when we are corralled by a comment or gesture into their world.

Penal Substitutionary Atonement is flawed on many levels. "This is something on which Thomas Aquinas is very helpful, and absolutely clear: God did not need the Cross in order to forgive sin. God’s forgiveness of sin is simply the product of his merciful and sovereign desire to forgive sin. Period."
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/inebriateme/2014/11/thoughts-against-penal-substitutionary-atonement/

Calvinist theology is, for me, absurd, almost totally flawed. Depraved, in its way. A flower with no fouler smell than TULIP.

What is the hard work? There is presently no acid test for t***h. Interpretations of the Constitution and the Bible are, as you noted, wide ranging and conflicting. The question then is, is there any sure way to interpret either correctly?

The true God? I firmly believe if all members of any religion were thoroughly vetted on what they believed about God and the various doctrines of their faith, no one would be in complete agreement. Six billion religious people and no total agreement by any of its members. So where is t***h?

The necessary discernment to best approximate t***h, in life or religion, is very difficult to achieve. And those that do somehow get this discernment, are too humble to proclaim it as t***h. It is just how they live. No proclamations. No speeches. No lectures. No preaching. Their heart and their hand. That's it!

Interesting, thank you.

Don't you just h**e the Constitutions and it protections? What other country on this planet would let an obviously guilty party go free because it so respects and honors the process of justice. None, that I know off. Letting the guilty go free is not, in itself, anything to celebrate.

Defending the Constitutional right to a trial by a jury of your peers, properly represented by a legal defense (whoever?), is not "reprehensible." What is reprehensible are those who want to do away with this rule of law or attack those who defend it. There will be too many times we object to the outcome of such trials, yet without them we are barbarians or anarchist.

Horrific, and it happens way too often to women who have been violated, but the video injured the case when it stated the defense can suppress evidence: that is not possible. If such evidence was "suppressed" it was the prosecutor who totally failed in having it heard. Yes, lawyers can manipulate testimony and evidence to favor their client, make the innocent appear guilty, and as unjust and outrageous as that appears in this case, we have to thank God we have this system in place. It sucks and is glorious, and there you have it.

I take no sides. I do have sides, being a 3 dimensional being, but politically none are favored. In this day and age, I have immediately made enemies of the Left and the Right. Though I would not call myself an Independent, for both parties have come to call those so labeled as either cowards or opportunists.

Weighing both sides of a question is no longer wise. Studied compromise has become betrayal. Are you for us or against us, is the present bar, no matter if you have cured cancer or found a way to balance the budget. How cares? It is not about problem-solving or a working government: it is all about having the approved of label.

I have a question: is T***h Conservative or Liberal? It seems to me it is neither: t***h is t***h and has no sides to take. Compromise, as anathema as it now has become--a defeat to concede anything, but what moves any government--avoids t***h. There is no real T***h in the Left or the Right. T***h is beyond such negotiated middle-ground or extremes of view. We all lose in this, when it happens (though rarely), cooperative mishmash by Congress to appear functional. Our Republic is utterly dependent on avoiding T***h for the well-managed appearance of progress or getting things done, leaving all of us in the Dark.