W
woodbrian77
Perhaps we should be careful about elevating one part over others.
For the body is not one member, but many. If the foot says,
“Because I am not a hand, I am not a part of the body,” it
is not for this reason any the less a part of the body. And
if the ear says, “Because I am not an eye, I am not a part
of the body,” it is not for this reason any the less a part
of the body. If the whole body were an eye, where would the
hearing be? If the whole were hearing, where would the sense
of smell be? But now God has placed the members, each one of
them, in the body, just as He desired. If they were all one
member, where would the body be? But now there are many
members, but one body. And the eye cannot say to the hand,
“I have no need of you”; or again the head to the feet,
“I have no need of you.” On the contrary, it is much truer
that the members of the body which seem to be weaker are
necessary; and those members of the body which we deem less
honorable, on these we bestow more abundant honor, and our
less presentable members become much more presentable,
whereas our more presentable members have no need of it.
But God has so composed the body, giving more abundant honor
to that member which lacked, so that there may be no
division in the body, but that the members may have the same
care for one another. And if one member suffers, all the
members suffer with it; if one member is honored, all the
members rejoice with it.
The above is my reply to a thread in comp.lang.c++.moderated.
It was rejected there so am posting it here. Better late
than never ...
Brian Wood
Ebenezer Enterprises
http://webEbenezer.net