What is more judgmental than presuming to proscribe the judgments of God Himself, like you typically do here, and to pre-judge and condemn innocent children to execution, as you seem to support Robinson, et al, in doing?

And please, don’t waste your time invoking the passage about throwing stones. It is the likes of Tiller & Robinson, not ORW, who deny that they are sinners; it is their ilk, not ORW’s, who physically endanger women caught, at least as often as not, in illicit sexual relationships. It is ORW you will hear saying “Neither do I condemn you; go and sin no more.” while you will hear the abortionistas encouraging more and more sexual promiscuity so there will be more unwanted babies for them to kill to keep up payments on their dream homes, gated communities, and lavish lifestyles…and, of course, to pay off all the modern Herods who keep the killing machinery all legal…

Say, doesn’t it get painful walking around all the time with shoes that belong on other feet?

And you still haven’t given any of us any reason to equate your distortions of scripture with the judgments of God. Again, what have you got against reason?

And YOUR point would be? Murder is always of great significance, especially to the victim and his/her Maker.
Why do you claim God as the ultimate Judge when you yourself seek to derogate and censure (dare we say, “judge”?!) people who at least attempt to live according to His judgments?! Perhaps if you had more respect for precepts/judgments such as “And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them.”, we might take your appeal to God’s judgment a little more seriously than we take, for instance, someone who claims to be a basket of pears, Mozart, Napoleon, etc. . .

And we can’t help wondering whether you would still reference a serial killer as a mere “random” person if you were his/her targeted victim. Nothing like a vested interest, is there, J? Or, it’s so easy to be pro-choice…as long as you’re not the one “chosen”. . .

Odd that you’d use a dog’s name as your own. Why such a strange choice?

A sign of the times? Yes, it was repopularized in the 60s as the symbol of the radical, leftist, socialist ‘counterculture’ but for centuries, it has been used to signify homage to the kingdom of Satan, and intent to lie, steal, kill and destroy. A little history lesson on Robinson’s pin, and the sympathies it expresses. . .
A broken, upside-down cross, and the Teutonic rune of death. It is also referred to as the “cross of Nero”, after the infamous Roman Emperor Reno — er, Nero, who hated Christianity, had the Apostle Peter crucified UPSIDE DOWN, and used this symbol to express his intent to destroy Christianity. This symbol is also known, variously, as the “crow’s foot”, “witch’s foot,” “sign of the broken Jew,” the “gesture of despair” and sign of “the death of man.” Revived in the sixties by hippies and others who protested nuclear weapons, Western culture, and Christian values, it is now euphemistically said to symbolize a utopian hope for a new age of global peace and earth-centered unity. While naively embraced and displayed even by some well-meaning but gravely misguided Christians, it has never lost it’s ‘Neronic’ significance as a universal symbol of evil, death, and mockery of Christ and His followers.

Germanic tribes who used it attributed mystical, occult powers to this sign, black magicians used it extensively in pagan incantations and condemnations. Even to this day, Germans recognize the inverted, broken cross — identical to the socialist’s sign of universal peace —as a ‘todersrune’, or death rune. In addition to being ordered by Hitler’s National Socialists to appear on German death notices, it was also part of the official inscription prescribed for the gravestones of the Nazi officers of the notorious deathmaking SS. This was in keeping with the Nazi emphasis on pagan mysticism.

This symbol has been a favorite among Satanists for centuries. Church of Satan founder Anton LaVey has used it as a backdrop for his altar, and a former witch has shared the following additional insight:

“It is an ancient and powerful symbol of anti-Christ. During the dark ages it was used in Druid witchcraft and by Satanists of all sorts in initiating a new member to their order. They would draw a magic(k) circle and give the initiate a cross. The initiate would then lift the cross and turn it upside down. He would then renounce Christianity in all three dimensions (sic) of time (past, present, and future) and break the horizontal pieces downward forming the design of the “Raven’s foot” [almost rhymes with Ravensbruck, certainly reminds one of it…and the millions of lives brutally trampled by that foot…] This ugly symbol is nothing short of blasphemy against the Holy Ghost. For one to wear or display this symbol is to announce, either knowingly or unknowingly, that you have rejected Christ. Remember, symbolism is picture language, and a picture is worth a thousand words.”

All this is certainly in keeping with the “comic book” (can anybody say “HATE SPEECH”?) published by Robinson’s cronies at Planned Parenthood Golden Gate.
Ok, so much for history; now for a little relevant philosophy:

“An imbecile habit has arisen in modern controversy of saying that such and such a creed can be held in one age but cannot be held in another. Some dogma, we are told, was credible in the twelfth century, but is not credible in the twentieth. You might as well say that a certain philosophy can be believed on Mondays, but cannot be believed on Tuesdays. You might as well say of a view of the cosmos that it was suitable to half-past three, but not suitable to half-past four. What a man can believe depends upon his philosophy, not upon the clock or the century. If a man believes in unalterable natural law, he cannot believe in any miracle in any age. If a man believes in a will behind law, he can believe in any miracle in any age. Suppose, for the sake of argument, we are concerned with a case of thaumaturgic healing. A materialist of the twelfth century could not believe it any more than a materialist of the twentieth century. But a Christian scientist of the twentieth century can believe it as much as a Christian of the twelfth century. It is simply a matter of a man’s theory of things. Therefore in dealing with any historical answer, the point is not whether it was given in our time, but whether it was given in answer to our question.” — G.K. Chesterton

At the heart of the “60s revolution” was the effort to replace judging the times by an absolute, transcendent standard of truth with judging the standard of truth by the times. Abortion is but one of the grosser manifestations of abandoning the truth for a subjective, me-centered “standard”; and, just as in Hitler’s time, it did not truthfully answer any of the questions it purported to address. During the 60s and into the early 70s, we heard the litany recited ad nauseam of all the “problems” legalized child-murder was supposed to solve: child abuse, world hunger, teen pregnancy, “overpopulation” (a myth from the start), right up to all the “legitimate medical aims” of embryonic stem cell research. Time for all “flower children”, whether aging or contemporary, to wake up and smell the truth: child abuse has increased at least 800%, teen pregnancy has increased, STD’s are now an epidemic due to the promiscuity promoted by the abortion profiteers and other pied pipers, world hunger is still rampant, and at least the majority of the medical evidence to date indicates that while adult stem cell research (which does not require the slaughter of the donor and, as such, is in keeping with the Nuremberg code) shows real promise of curing/treating various afflictions, embryonic stem cell research (which is used to justify the taking of innocent human lives that it requires, and thus violates the Nuremberg code) has proved to be woefully counterproductive.

Maybe instead of answers “blowin’ in the wind”, it’s time to look for those cut in stone on Mt. Sinai. They’ve stood the test of time and proven beneficial for all humanity that keeps them, not just an elitist bunch of narcissistic, bloodthirsty snobs that think that the whole planet and everything and everyone on it belongs, or should belong, to them.