Page 8 of 12 FirstFirst ... 678910 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 80 of 116

Thread: Morally Wrong Behavior vs. What the Civil Government Should Prohibit

  1. #71
    tWebber seer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    New England
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    26,315
    Amen (Given)
    1955
    Amen (Received)
    5467
    Quote Originally Posted by shunyadragon View Post
    Actually it ia an equivalent problem that their scriptures and cultures lack the spiritual laws and teachings that forbid slavery as Judeo Christian scriptures lack the spiritual laws to forbid slavery. Christianity claims to be a mark above the standards of the culture around them, but as matter of fact they are just like everyone else and the sulture around them, no better nor no worse.
    So what? Your religion came into being when slavery was just about abolished in the West, and abolished largely by Christians. Glad to see you were following our lead. And again Shuny, slavery in the West was largely based on man stealing (kidnapping men and selling them into slavery) and that is sin (immoral) in Scripture.


    No it is not, slavery is justified and cononed in both testaments including the buying and selling of slaves in the Old Testament. It remains a fact that slavery is not forbidden in either of the Testaments, and slavery remained common in Christianity up until the 18th century.
    Are you denying that man stealing is a sin? And there is nothing immoral about selling ones self into slavery for advantage. But I'm glad that the Baha'i followed the example that Christian set by rejecting slavery.
    Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

  2. #72
    tWebber seer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    New England
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    26,315
    Amen (Given)
    1955
    Amen (Received)
    5467
    Quote Originally Posted by Tassman View Post
    Slavery was accepted from ancient times in ALL cultures including by Christians.
    You act like that was a bad thing.


    Demonstrably it wasn't "a big deal" to anyone (including Christians) until relatively recently.
    And why would it be a big deal to the relativist today?


    Well yes, it is - as was recognized during the Enlightenment. The recognition of universal human rights lends itself to our survival as a social species. The origin of morality is biology and natural selection, not theology.
    That is just stupid Tass, there are no universal moral wrongs in your world, nor can there be. And AGAIN - it wasn't rational humanists NOR their writings that put an end to slavery in the West, it was Christian activists using the love of one's neighbor and the golden rule as God given principles. John Locke one of the great Enlightenment thinkers grounded human rights in the God of the Bible.


    You are wrong. Christians as such did NOT put an end to slavery. It came to an end with the recognition by ALL people of Enlightenment values such as liberty, toleration and equal rights. Values which were initially resisted by many - including many Christians.
    Again Tass, list all the rational humanists that were in the forefront of the abolition movement. Or stop making false claims.


    This passage (unwittingly perhaps) reinforces our evolved recognition of the importance of social cohesion in surviving as a social species.

    No doubt the Christian plantation-owners felt the same way as you do, that slavery was "just fine".
    Idiot the point was we can and did have social cohesion even with slavery. So your argument is stupid - rejecting slavery is not necessary for cohesion, try again.
    Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

  3. #73
    tWebber shunyadragon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Hillsborough, NC
    Faith
    Agnostic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    14,604
    Amen (Given)
    1612
    Amen (Received)
    997
    Quote Originally Posted by seer View Post
    So what? Your religion came into being when slavery was just about abolished in the West, and abolished largely by Christians. Glad to see you were following our lead. And again Shuny, slavery in the West was largely based on man stealing (kidnapping men and selling them into slavery) and that is sin (immoral) in Scripture.
    False, slavery was dominant in the USA up until 1860s, and in Christianity. Slavery may have been ended in the British Isles, but it continued by the British in India elsewhere, and in the Caribbean. It was 'some' Christians and secular humanists that were abolishonists. There are considerable writings against slavery inspired by Enlightenment philosophers.

    [quote[ Are you denying that man stealing is a sin? [/quote]

    No where in the Bible is stated that it was a sin to buy and sell slaves.

    And there is nothing immoral about selling ones self into slavery for advantage.
    Indentured servitude was common among the Jews, but so was the buying. selling and owning of foreign slaves.


    But I'm glad that the Baha'i followed the example that Christian set by rejecting slavery.
    No, because no where in the Bible, Torah, Tanakh nor the Quran does it specifically reject slavery.
    Last edited by shunyadragon; 02-13-2020 at 07:18 PM.
    Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
    Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
    But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

    go with the flow the river knows . . .

    Frank

    I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

  4. #74
    tWebber Tassman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Sydney/Phuket
    Faith
    Atheist
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    11,969
    Amen (Given)
    2592
    Amen (Received)
    1887
    Quote Originally Posted by seer View Post



    And why would it be a big deal to the relativist today?
    For the same reason it has been a big deal to the Christian relativist throughout history. Morality has demonstrably evolved over time from culture to culture for both religious believers and secularists. It is “relativist” to both.

    Idiot the point was we can and did have social cohesion even with slavery. So your argument is stupid - rejecting slavery is not necessary for cohesion, try again.
    You didn't have social cohesion for the slaves - nor for those discriminated against during the Jim Crow era, nor disenfranchised women or closeted LGBT's or Jews or 'furreigners'. But I guess it was cohesive for the majority.
    “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

  5. #75
    Evolution is God's ID rogue06's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Southeastern U.S. of A.
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    56,167
    Amen (Given)
    1177
    Amen (Received)
    20628
    Quote Originally Posted by shunyadragon View Post
    False, slavery was dominant in the USA up until 1860s, and in Christianity. Slavery may have been ended in the British Isles, but it continued by the British in India elsewhere, and in the Caribbean. It was 'some' Christians and secular humanists that were abolishonists. There are considerable writings against slavery inspired by Enlightenment philosophers.
    One of the primary reasons that the South seceded was that slavery wasn't dominant and was becoming less and less so.

    I'm always still in trouble again

    "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
    "Of course, human life begins at fertilization that’s not the argument." --Tassman

  6. #76
    tWebber seer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    New England
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    26,315
    Amen (Given)
    1955
    Amen (Received)
    5467
    Quote Originally Posted by shunyadragon View Post
    False, slavery was dominant in the USA up until 1860s, and in Christianity. Slavery may have been ended in the British Isles, but it continued by the British in India elsewhere, and in the Caribbean. It was 'some' Christians and secular humanists that were abolishonists. There are considerable writings against slavery inspired by Enlightenment philosophers.
    The year your faith began was in the middle of the Civil war which ended Slavery in the US, and it was ended in the British Empire. Your religion just jumped on the Bandwagon. And yes there were Enlightenment philosophers who were against slavery, but it was Christian activists that got it done. And AGAIN list the "secular humanists" who were involved in the abolition movement. I will be waiting.

    No where in the Bible is stated that it was a sin to buy and sell slaves.
    Yet it was sin to kidnap and that largely was what slavery was fueled by in the West. And I keep asking you - why is slavery immoral in the first place?

    Indentured servitude was common among the Jews, but so was the buying. selling and owning of foreign slaves.
    There is no difference between indentured servitude and slavery in the Old Testament.


    No, because no where in the Bible, Torah, Tanakh nor the Quran does it specifically reject slavery.
    That is funny because people like Hanna More, the Quakers, the Stowe family, etc...argued against slavery on biblical grounds:

    The mind of the abolitionists

    Christian abolitionists came from across the denominational spectrum and from various parts of the British Atlantic world. Yet throughout their varied writings, a number of key themes appear again and again.

    ‘Of one blood’: the idea of brotherhood

    Abolitionists believed passionately in the fatherhood of God and the brotherhood of man. Indeed, the campaign’s logo (devised by Josiah Wedgwood) was an image of a manacled slave on his knees beseeching his captor: ‘Am I not a man and a brother?’ Antislavery activism relied on the conviction that all people were made in God’s image (Genesis 1:26–27) and precious in his sight. God was the Father of all mankind, all nations were his ‘offspring’, ‘of one blood’ (Acts 17:26). Disturbed that blacks ‘stand convicted – of a darker skin!’, the Anglican Evangelical Hannah More urged her readers to ‘Respect his image which they bear…They still are men, and men shou’d still be free’.[11] ‘Africans and Europeans, Pagans and Christians, are all on a level’, wrote the Calvinist Baptist Abraham Booth. Oppressed Africans ‘are brethren of the human kind’.[12] ‘We are the common offspring of one universal Parent’, wrote the Anglican Thomas Bradshaw, ‘with whom there is no respect of persons’.[13] When William Cowper contemplated slavery he lamented that ‘the natural bond/Of brotherhood is sever’d’.[14] Every reader of Scripture should know, wrote Cowper,

    That souls have no discriminating hue,
    Alike important in their Maker’s view;
    That none are free from blemish since the fall,
    And love divine has paid one price for all.[15]



    The doctrines of creation, fall and redemption underscored human equality in the eyes of God.

    The Christian belief in the fundamental unity of the human race clashed with fashionable theories of polygenesis and African inferiority, promoted by infidel philosophers. As Davis explains, ‘early antislavery writers like James Ramsay and Granville Sharp repeatedly identified the theory of racial inferiority with Hume, Voltaire, and materialistic philosophy in general; they explicitly presented their attacks on slavery as a vindication of Christianity, moral accountability, and the unity of mankind’.[16] Hannah More deplored the new philosophical racism:

    Perish th’ illiberal thought which wou’d debase
    The native genius of the sable race
    Perish the proud philosophy, which sought
    To rob them of the pow’rs of equal thought!
    Does then th’ immortal principle within
    Change with the casual colour of a skin?[17]

    The most eloquent testimony against ideas of racial inferiority came from black converts to Christianity. Abolitionists pointed to the writings of accomplished Africans: the letters of Ignatius Sancho, the poems of Phillis Wheatley, and the autobiography of Olaudah Equiano.[18] Equiano himself pointed to Scripture. Commenting on a book arguing ‘that the Negro race is an inferior species of mankind’, he wrote indignantly: ‘Oh fool! See the 17th chapter of the Acts, verse 26: “God hath made of one blood all nations of men, for to dwell on all the face of the earth”’. Working out the logical implications of the text, Equiano argued in favour of racial intermarriage, and went on to marry Susannah Cullen of Soham in Cambridgeshire.[19]



    ‘Deliverance to the captives’: the idea of liberty slavery

    Abolitionists believed that common humanity entailed equal rights, especially the right to liberty. Because liberty was a gift of the Creator, men were not free to dispose of it by selling themselves into slavery, nor could they lawfully deprive anyone else of their liberty by force. The slave-traders’ claim that Africans were now the property of Europeans was without foundation in natural law, and constituted a violation of natural rights. The Scottish philosophers who developed this line of argument were building on the Christian natural law tradition – Francis Hutcheson was a Church of Scotland minister, and James Beattie was a well known critic of Hume’s irreligion. Their argument had great appeal. ‘Liberty’, wrote John Wesley, ‘is the right of every human creature, as soon as he breathes the vital air. And no human can deprive him of that right, which he derives from the law of nature’.[20] Hannah More also used the language of human rights...
    Last edited by seer; 02-14-2020 at 04:49 AM.
    Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

  7. #77
    tWebber shunyadragon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Hillsborough, NC
    Faith
    Agnostic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    14,604
    Amen (Given)
    1612
    Amen (Received)
    997
    Quote Originally Posted by rogue06 View Post
    One of the primary reasons that the South seceded was that slavery wasn't dominant and was becoming less and less so.
    Actually . . . false the invention of the cotton gin increased the need for slavery. By the testimony of the leaders of the Southern states keeping slavery in the South was the primary reason for the Civil War. Don;t try and rewrite history. Facts are facts.
    Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
    Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
    But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

    go with the flow the river knows . . .

    Frank

    I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

  8. #78
    tWebber shunyadragon's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    Hillsborough, NC
    Faith
    Agnostic
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    14,604
    Amen (Given)
    1612
    Amen (Received)
    997
    Quote Originally Posted by seer View Post
    The year your faith began was in the middle of the Civil war which ended Slavery in the US, and it was ended in the British Empire. Your religion just jumped on the Bandwagon. And yes there were Enlightenment philosophers who were against slavery, but it was Christian activists that got it done. And AGAIN list the "secular humanists" who were involved in the abolition movement. I will be waiting.
    I did and gave a reference, and you are avoiding the reference. Still waiting . . .

    The Baha'i Faith actually began in 1844. No bandwagon here, because slavery actually did not end with the Civil War. Forced Penal Servitude remained up to the early 20th century, and slavery remained in other places in the world like India and the Caribbean.

    Yet it was sin to kidnap and that largely was what slavery was fueled by in the West. And I keep asking you - why is slavery immoral in the first place?
    No you have not been keep asking me. If slavery was never condemned in the Bible, and it was described as an accepted institution as buying, selling and owning slaves why are you asking the question in bold above.



    There is no difference between indentured servitude and slavery in the Old Testament.

    Your self imposed ignorance of the Bible is appalling. The Old Testament describes specifically Indentured servitude fo be Hebrews indentured to Hebrews, and Foreign slaves bought, sold and owned by Hebrews.

    That is funny because people like Hanna More, the Quakers, the Stowe family, etc...argued against slavery on biblical grounds:
    Not funny, because there is nothing in the Bible that forbids any kind of slavery.
    Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
    Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
    But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

    go with the flow the river knows . . .

    Frank

    I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

  9. #79
    tWebber seer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    New England
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    26,315
    Amen (Given)
    1955
    Amen (Received)
    5467
    Quote Originally Posted by shunyadragon View Post
    I did and gave a reference, and you are avoiding the reference. Still waiting . . .

    The Baha'i Faith actually began in 1844. No bandwagon here, because slavery actually did not end with the Civil War. Forced Penal Servitude remained up to the early 20th century, and slavery remained in other places in the world like India and the Caribbean.
    Shuny you did not list secular humanists who were involved in the abolition movement. Please reference the post. Or stop fibbing...


    No you have not been keep asking me. If slavery was never condemned in the Bible, and it was described as an accepted institution as buying, selling and owning slaves why are you asking the question in bold above.
    Then answer, why is slavery immoral?


    Your self imposed ignorance of the Bible is appalling. The Old Testament describes specifically Indentured servitude fo be Hebrews indentured to Hebrews, and Foreign slaves bought, sold and owned by Hebrews.
    Nonsense, Hebrews were sold to each other as slaves, the only difference if that they were offered freedom after seven years. You are an idiot.

    If you buy a Hebrew slave, he must remain your slave for six years. But in the seventh year you must set him free, without cost to him. 3 If he was single at the time you bought him, he alone must be set free. But if he was married at the time, both he and his wife must be given their freedom. 4 If you give him a wife, and they have children, only the man himself must be set free; his wife and children remain the property of his owner.Exodus 21


    Not funny, because there is nothing in the Bible that forbids any kind of slavery.
    The point is Shuny that these Christian abolitionists used Bible principles to make their case.
    Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

  10. #80
    tWebber seer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    New England
    Faith
    Christian
    Gender
    Male
    Posts
    26,315
    Amen (Given)
    1955
    Amen (Received)
    5467
    Quote Originally Posted by Tassman View Post
    You didn't have social cohesion for the slaves - nor for those discriminated against during the Jim Crow era, nor disenfranchised women or closeted LGBT's or Jews or 'furreigners'. But I guess it was cohesive for the majority.
    Yes it was cohesive for the majority, and why is that wrong?
    Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •