However, when answering for what I know to be true about an untoward incident, the courts prevent discussion about the prior behavior of the claimant because it’s used to illustrate the damage that’s been done by those who choose to use a person’s personal history to justify their own behavior. What’s in question is how that rule has been established. Why is it wrong to confront a rule that allows for damage of any kind?

The use of our father’s commandments (or, at least the God of my father’s commandments) may seem a strange remedy to some, so I don’t refer to the use of vibrational noise in my own family's home as a crime either, because it seems to be used for the same purpose: to correct the power to rule by other means. There are many different cultures and people well prepared to replace the control over problems that most can hardly admit to, who already know better just how to do so.

The use of a scalpel to control a person is barbaric! But to encounter a crime scene that seems to serve as a counter point to our criticism, by pointing to the folly of failing to do so (the remains resulting from an encounter with a courtyard) is madness.

Can't we make progress by learning to see what's really going on? We can’t condemn, or fault the effort to correct what we know to be wrong, but what we’ve forgotten is that the surgeon’s power to do so still rules, and is barbaric. But without some form of control over our libido (and egos), we’re likely to be forced to live with things like rape simply because some believe we ought to have the right to do after suffering with an otherwise useless injury to a member pleading for relief upon the examination of the belittling proceedure.

Please see also: Career Path

Until a new solution is as clear and convincing as the discovery of our old one, we may need the backup afforded by that rule just to survive the shock that results from investigation. I do not pretend to be capable of the power to judge, or apprehend a threat, I’m only restating what I know to be true because I was asked to, and because a claimants' fears were based upon directly related unruly behavior that I could substantiate.

I was required by my community to respond more carefully to injury after my friend Davy was found without remedy, and then spanked for responding to another just a few years later. A child, trying to obey the expectation of a people's correction, doesn't know what to do anymore when chastised for doing their will. So when confronted with yet another injury once again, he just keeps his hands on the wheel, and eyes on the road, while yet another victim - who might’ve been saved by a healthy adaptation, hangs by the neck as a result of unfair treatment that paralyzed him.

IMID