Comment on Imma leave this here. by 13datura31
Having a firm grasp of one's history, I can understand. But the whole "sins of the father" thing is ridiculous. I'm not personally responsible for any action done by any of my ancestors. Why should I act as such?
Your fathers knew the consequences of their actions, as their offspring, you share the blame.
I have no involvement with those actions, outside of being related by blood. Each and every person is responsible for their own actions. Why should the offspring have be responsible for the actions of their ancestors?
because you are the only one around to take the blame for their actions once they die.
Again, I am not personally responsible for the actions of my ancestors. Why does there have to be an heir to the blame? Why must such a thing inherited? <i?why?< i=""></i?why?<>
I have given you the reasons. Just saying "why?" doesnt change anything.
What I'm getting at is; when the persons responsible for the actions are dead, should the blame not die with them? Why should it instead get transferred unto someone who had no control over or responsibility for it?
Sins of the fathers, the responsibility of that error must more onto the children so the debt can be paid in full.
View all replies
Whoa, HTML. You don' goofed.
*Why?
*Why?