As You See It: Oct. 3, 2010

As You See It: Oct. 3, 2010

There are 31 comments on the Santa Cruz Sentinel story from Oct 3, 2010, titled As You See It: Oct. 3, 2010. In it, Santa Cruz Sentinel reports that:

You either believe in preserving historical homes or you do not. The City Council, for the first time, has overruled its Historic Preservation Commission for the purpose of granting a historical alternation permit for a home yet to be improved.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Santa Cruz Sentinel.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
StartThinking

Oakland, CA

#22 Oct 3, 2010
Point blank, Meg Whitman hired an agency and had all her facts straight. If you believe other wise your high and still not off the cloud you were on at Burning man.

Next, this city is a pile of you know what and has no appeal to tourists any more. I know many friends who decided to vacation else where because they do not want to be inundated with all the liberal mumbo jumbo and the non stop violence.

The coonertys are the first problem with our city, and all their cronies. Next, any one who says that tripling fines on halloween is wrong is because it targets a certain group of people is a jerk. Tripling fines does TARGET a certain group of people. Ones who break the law! DUH! Jerk!

Now that I am done being immature, I must go tend to my garden, while it is still legal and not being fined for growing my own food. YET.
brad

San Jose, CA

#23 Oct 3, 2010
dON wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you ignoring the 3 references to this (an eye for an eye..) in the Torah books?
http://www.adventistbiblicalresearch.org/Bibl...
This probably is the most over used and misinterpreted verse in the bible. Rather than being a justification for revenge or capital punishment, it is actually based (as dON's referenced site says) on the law of equivalency, meaning the punishment should be like the injury. It is the moral equivalent of “cruel and unusual punishment” and “equal protection under the law.” Without the law of equivalency a poor man could be put to death for stealing bread while a rich man would pay off the family of his murder victim. As far as the death penalty goes, there are many crimes, actually most crimes, in the Old Testament that were punishable by death. The reason is simple, nomadic tribes like the Jews, wondering in the desert, did not have jails for incarceration. If the law was broken and could be handled civilly, the only other option was the death penalty. There is really little indication in the New Testament on how Jesus felt criminality should be dealt with. But he did say in Matthew 5:58-39,“You have heard that it was said, "An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth". But I say to you, do not resist an evildoer. If anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also.” Any person who believes that Jesus would condone capital punishment when there was another way to protect society and preserve life is living in a religious world of relativism. The site referenced by dON ends with “4. Jesus and the law of equivalency.“The intent of the law of retribution was to ensure that the punishment corresponded to the crime in order to control the punishment inflicted on the guilty one. In Matthew 5:38-42 Jesus was not abrogating this important legal principle, but was rather inviting Christians in their daily lives to go beyond the letter of the law. The implicit intention of the law—to eliminate personal revenge—was stated explicitly by Jesus; and He, in His own person and ministry, modeled it for us.” When it comes to capital punishment, it is best to leave god out of it, because he will bring it up to you later under less opportune circumstances.
Working stiff

AOL

#24 Oct 3, 2010
Highspanic Madrigal wrote:
Pamela Comstock rightly criticizes Tony Madrigal's elitist putdown of the poor as having criminal tendencies, but Watsonville's city councilman Manuel Bersamin was even worse at the Sept. 28 hearing on fluoridation - which he helped approve. In arguing for the necessity of fluoridation, Bersamin claimed poorer residents are not educated enough to know how or why to brush their teeth, saying (quoted from Oct. 2nd Register-Pajaronian editorial):
"We're talking about parents with less than an elementary educations. They don't understand preventative dental care. When you say 'Why don't they stop kids from eating these candies?' I don't know what world you're living in."
Like editor Jon Chown added to that quote: "These folks working in our fields may lack a formal education, but they are not stupid." Well to "High-spanics" Madrigal and Bersamin they are naturally stupid, and with a criminal inclination. Pathetic!
Good points about the "High-spanics" Madrigal and Bersamin. They claim to represent farmworkers and other poor people, but I doubt if either of them would recognize a strawberry unless it was first dipped in chocolate and set on a silver tray.
loweroceanlocal

Longview, WA

#25 Oct 3, 2010
dON wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you ignoring the 3 references to this in the Torah books?
http://www.adventistbiblicalresearch.org/Bibl...
im not jewish, i am a christian, we do not focus on the old testament, as we have discovered that there is no way to follow all those rules. the messiah came and he told us to use the ten commandments, and he told us that we are white as snow, because we are washed in the blood of the lamb. jesus quoted the torah in the bible in mathew chapter five, jesus says that we are not to take an eye for an eye, rather we are to turn the other cheek. there is a new covenant.
GOP 2010

Santa Cruz, CA

#26 Oct 3, 2010
what would Jesus do???
Poof!!!!(length of rope appears by magic)yull be "forgiven" for hanging some coward killers.....
Ambrose Bierce

United States

#27 Oct 3, 2010
To Will Hay: As long as we're taking little quotes from biblical texts and using them to support a point of view with a simpleton approach; What part of "An eye for an eye" do you not understand?
loweroceanlocal

Longview, WA

#28 Oct 3, 2010
Ambrose Bierce wrote:
To Will Hay: As long as we're taking little quotes from biblical texts and using them to support a point of view with a simpleton approach; What part of "An eye for an eye" do you not understand?
the part that you seem to think is still in effect. read mathew chapter five, no more an eye for an eye. an ey for an eye and a tooth for the a tooth will only make the whole world blind and toothless.
Liberty or Death

Watsonville, CA

#29 Oct 4, 2010
brad wrote:
<quoted text>This probably is the most over used and misinterpreted verse in the bible. Rather than being a justification for revenge or capital punishment, it is actually based (as dON's referenced site says) on the law of equivalency, meaning the punishment should be like the injury. It is the moral equivalent of “cruel and unusual punishment” and “equal protection under the law.” Without the law of equivalency a poor man could be put to death for stealing bread while a rich man would pay off the family of his murder victim. As far as the death penalty goes, there are many crimes, actually most crimes, in the Old Testament that were punishable by death. The reason is simple, nomadic tribes like the Jews, wondering in the desert, did not have jails for incarceration. If the law was broken and could be handled civilly, the only other option was the death penalty. There is really little indication in the New Testament on how Jesus felt criminality should be dealt with. But he did say in Matthew 5:58-39,“You have heard that it was said, "An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth". But I say to you, do not resist an evildoer. If anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also.” Any person who believes that Jesus would condone capital punishment when there was another way to protect society and preserve life is living in a religious world of relativism. The site referenced by dON ends with “4. Jesus and the law of equivalency.“The intent of the law of retribution was to ensure that the punishment corresponded to the crime in order to control the punishment inflicted on the guilty one. In Matthew 5:38-42 Jesus was not abrogating this important legal principle, but was rather inviting Christians in their daily lives to go beyond the letter of the law. The implicit intention of the law—to eliminate personal revenge—was stated explicitly by Jesus; and He, in His own person and ministry, modeled it for us.” When it comes to capital punishment, it is best to leave god out of it, because he will bring it up to you later under less opportune circumstances.
Now THAT's grace.
Liberty or Death

Watsonville, CA

#30 Oct 4, 2010
loweroceanlocal wrote:
<quoted text>
im not jewish, i am a christian, we do not focus on the old testament, as we have discovered that there is no way to follow all those rules. the messiah came and he told us to use the ten commandments, and he told us that we are white as snow, because we are washed in the blood of the lamb. jesus quoted the torah in the bible in mathew chapter five, jesus says that we are not to take an eye for an eye, rather we are to turn the other cheek. there is a new covenant.
Good word. And you're not "nuts".
Peace, Friend.
loweroceanlocal

Longview, WA

#31 Oct 4, 2010
Liberty or Death wrote:
<quoted text>
Good word. And you're not "nuts".
Peace, Friend.
naw i'm definitely nuts, but that has nothing to do with what the bible says, or what is right. even a nut like me knows that peace and forgiveness are what the creator wants out of us, peace to you too.
senseless

Santa Cruz, CA

#32 Oct 4, 2010
loweroceanlocal wrote:
<quoted text>
im not jewish, i am a christian, we do not focus on the old testament, as we have discovered that there is no way to follow all those rules. the messiah came and he told us to use the ten commandments, and he told us that we are white as snow, because we are washed in the blood of the lamb. jesus quoted the torah in the bible in mathew chapter five, jesus says that we are not to take an eye for an eye, rather we are to turn the other cheek. there is a new covenant.
You need help,....Quit using "we" to define your colorblind condition...

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Big Box Retailers Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Pittsfield councilor wants Walmart impact study Dec 30 Cops are degenerates 1
News Facts shed light on the folly of hoarding bulbs... (Jun '11) Nov '16 Moonbeam 4
News Chambers Filled For Conyers' Appointment to Pit... Sep '16 Cops are degenerates 7
News Wal-Mart may re-examine Vallejo store (Feb '08) Jul '16 Walter 29
News To Serve God and Wal-Mart: The Making of Christ... (Jun '09) Jul '16 Sam 92
News Target stock plummets as "transgender" bathroom... (May '16) Jul '16 Hillary liar liar 109
News Opinions divided, politely, over gay pride marc... (Jul '16) Jul '16 Logic Analysis 5
More from around the web