Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
My point is that those who condemned slavery benefitted from it just as much as those who practiced it.
First, you said that slavery benefitted everybody. When I asked you if that was also true for the slaves you went silent on the subject.
Second, people who practiced slavery obviously benefitted more than people who didn’t. People who ran cotton plantations often had quite lavish lifestyles, paid for by the benefits of slave labor. People who protested slavery paid a bit less for their underwear. I see a difference there.
Third, people who did not practice it could not help but derive some peripheral benefits, despite their opposition. If somebody sells me clothing that is marginally cheaper because of slave labor, I cannot realistically find the slave who picked the cotton and give him a dollar. However, I can work to end slavery.
I believe that I have thoroughly refuted your point. If I have missed anything, please let me know and we can continue to discuss.
Quote:
And those who condemn it today seem to have no problem with the system of low wage manual laborers who continue to sustain them.
Low wage is different from slavery. These are incredibly different. Plus, many people do vote with their dollars. I refuse to purchase from Walmart and Target because of their import practices. I try to purchase domestically made clothing, or at least fair trade clothing, which I do pay a premium for.
I purchase domestically raised beef and poultry, and I purchase my vegetables from local farmers.
I work in a union shop, and I hire union labor.
Yes, I do benefit somewhat from the wage differential in other countries. I wish it weren’t so, but I cannot very well boycott all foreign products.
My point is that those who condemned slavery benefitted from it just as much as those who practiced it. And those who condemn it today seem to have no problem with the system of low wage manual laborers who continue to sustain them.
But that's not what you said in your previous post about slavery.
My point is that those who condemned slavery benefitted from it just as much as those who practiced it. And those who condemn it today seem to have no problem with the system of low wage manual laborers who continue to sustain them.
Strangely enough, this relates directly to the original question. Old pagan religions were not "revealed" religions. For instance, there is a well known story of how Thor went fishing with a couple giants, and managed to hook Jormungandr, the world serpent, whose scales are the swells of the sea. Thor pulled and pulled, but couldn't get Jormungandr off of the bottom. The frost giants were terrified, because if he managed to actually pull the ocean off of the bottom it would destroy the world. This is a teaching story about storm surge, which the Carolinas learned after their recent visit from Thor.
Christianity is a "revealed" religion, where the priests and prophets claim to be speaking in the voice of god. Rather than a teaching story, Christianity is in the form of commandments designed to enslave the worshippers to their religion. Adherents are supposed to submit to their god, which would have been unthinkable to pagans.
So no, Christianity has poisoned the mythological well. It is corrupted by slavery at its very roots. When it is extinct as a religion, no one will recall it with affection.
My point is that those who condemned slavery benefitted from it just as much as those who practiced it. And those who condemn it today seem to have no problem with the system of low wage manual laborers who continue to sustain them.
No, you're lying. And blatantly so. I've have delineated several examples of those who most certainly did not benefit from slavery. Since you have no answer, you have pretended not to see that post. That's part of your dishonest shtick, Ozzy. So is petulant outrage that people are responding to what you wrote instead of what you claim you meant.
I cited the examples of the Irish immigrant in the city of New York, or the farmer in Michigan. To assert that those individuals benefited from slavery to the same degree as a plantation owner with 100 slaves is a blatant lie, because even you are obviously not that colossally ignorant of the sort of third-grade math and market understanding to realize as much. To state that that poor Southern white whose work and wages are being undercut by the forced labor of slavery benefits from slavery to any real degree, to say nothing of your absurd 'just as much' assertion, as the plantation owner whose 100 enslaved human beings allow him to live a life of upper-class luxury, can be characterized as nothing but a lie. And that doesn't even address the fact that it's glaringly obvious that slaves didn't benefit from slavery.
Let's review:
*In your eagerness to excuse Christianity from it complicity in slavery, you're extolling the supposed virtues of slavery
*You're complaining that you point was being misconstrued (it's not - those of us who have mocked your excuses for slavery have done so alongside refuted your point, not instead of doing so)
*You're whining that refutation of the interference you're running for slavery, as well as you obviously-wrong claim that "With slavery, everyone wins!" amounts to bullying
*You pointedly pretend not to see examples that demonstrate how obviously wrong your point is, then tell "Liar!"
Frankly, you've pretty much followed you usual template with this thread.
At least I would say rather than 'Lying', Ozzy has gone to absurd extremes of apologetic to excuse Christianity from being too doctrinally tolerant of slavery. It is. Not just because of the OT which regards slavery (both of foreigners, and also fellow Jews) as something to be regulated, not banned, but the NT regards slavery as something to be accepted, not denounced.
It is of course changes in human ethics that led to abolition, and the religious could side with it (and pretend that the religion deserved the credit) or oppose and find plenty of support in the Bible - and still do, on the quiet.
But again, I find is intriguing and amusing to see Ozzy, who is by no means your cover -to cover Bible -believer, becomes such an extreme batter for the Bible, even to the extent of compromising his own reputation as a reasonable and unbiased debator.
Why, Ozzy, is excusing the Bible and Christianity of faults that it obviously has, so important to you?
I think that there is an Emotional attachment to it, rather the way there is an Emotional attachment (in the UK and even former colonies) to the Royals, so Republicans who would like to see them Gone are regarded rather as atheists were, say - before the 90's. Even though we all know they are a white elephant and a bit of an embarrassment these days.
But even I am hoping I last long enough to see a Charles III and William V
What about an endless search for the missing link? or acceptance of nihilism?
Personally I want to see that huge Atheists slush -fund (currently used to bribe world's scientists to lie that they believe in evolution) to do the Atheist equivalent of the search for the Ark - digging up Egypt looking for the original Josephus with what he Really wrote about Jesus.
Let's review:
*In your eagerness to excuse Christianity from it complicity in slavery, you're extolling the supposed virtues of slavery
*You're complaining that you point was being misconstrued (it's not - those of us who have mocked your excuses for slavery have done so alongside refuted your point, not instead of doing so)
*You're whining that refutation of the interference you're running for slavery, as well as you obviously-wrong claim that "With slavery, everyone wins!" amounts to bullying
*You pointedly pretend not to see examples that demonstrate how obviously wrong your point is, then tell "Liar!"
Frankly, you've pretty much followed you usual template with this thread.
It does christian apologists little good to attempt to excuse christianity from its complicity in slavery since the Southern Baptists, Methodists, catholics, and Episcopals have formally apologized for slavery and/or racism.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
