> opposite-sides rule for severing hands and feet is a way to be merciful so the punished blasphemer can walk on crutches at very least I didn't see any "/s" i

> opposite-sides rule for severing hands and feet is a way to be merciful so the punished blasphemer can walk on crutches at very least I didn't see any "/s" in your post so I'm somewhat confused. Discussion of religion gets dangerous because it seems to morph into attacks. I've no interest in that but I do in laws in that name because then it's literally my (and everybody else's) business. The key issue is melding of Church and State -- not a good idea according to the founders of the United States. Giving the Church the power of the State is a recipe for tyranny. While it doesn't get enough attention, there's an active effort for the United States to do this very thing. We need to have civil dialog for the repudiation of that but avoid framing it in an attack on religion itself. If you read this and disagree, go ahead and down-vote this but please explain why so perhaps we can someday find agreement.