In America and other countries with juries, they have to be protected from these opinions in order to independently form their own. And then they collectively are asked to judge and their consensus is the result.

The reason - mostly biblical - behind not judging is we allow people to be themselves, we don't discriminate or bear false witness. Now, when you have mountains of information which is the whole point of a trial, to interrogate the truth...now that you should have bucket loads of information to work with....now you still don't judge?
Do you not judge the groceries you buy, carefully choosing the best produce? Do you not carefully evaluate a potential partner. And here, in a court scenario where this is exactly what is at state - a wrongdoing has been committed and the accused is asked to account, and then be judged. When the public has access to these records, yes, as society they SHOULD be interested in the possible guilt or innocence. How you express that is another matter entirely. But this thought of NEVER judge, and don't judge a book by it's cover, is garbage.
Failure to discern is what's wrong with the world, and thinking this is one's Christian duty (not to think) is, frankly, terrifying. Might as well start a war then, and not judge its merits...judgement is wrong, but war is right. Please!
1 comment:
Very nice.
I am sharing some of my favorite friendship sms here.
Post a Comment