It has no place in an egalitarian society. It's so dumb that they knew it was dumb in the 18th century. That's why corruption of blood is forbidden in the US Constitution. It wasn't even a later amendment."Sins of the Father". A phrase referring to one's ancestral misdeeds or really just some backwards thinking that should've stayed in the 20th Century. Any thoughts?
The children of this father are not so innocent after all. In the same book, God describes how nobody will be punished for somebody else’s actions:'You shall not make for yourself an idol, or any likeness of what is in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the water under the earth. 'You shall not worship them or serve them; for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children, and on the third and the fourth generations of those who hate Me, but showing lovingkindness to thousands, to those who love Me and keep My commandments. Deuteronomy 5:8-10
Context and reading comprehension.The person who sins will die. The son will not bear the punishment for the father's iniquity, nor will the father bear the punishment for the son's iniquity; the righteousness of the righteous will be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked will be upon himself. (Ezekiel 18:20)
That's a different situation though; that's more an intimation tactic.I heard they still do that in North Korea- If you piss off Kim Jong Un bad enough, he'll sentence you, your kids,and your kids' kids, to the gulag. "Three generations punishment".
Sure, that's the aim, but if you're the gulag'd kid, or grandkid, you're getting punished for your ancestor's sins.That's a different situation though; that's more an intimation tactic.
Some people might be willing to throw their own lives away to stand up to the government, but wouldn't do it if it hurt their own kids and grandchildren.