Re: You stand up against slavery and sit idle thinking about what people who...

Fordtunate Son

All-In [29883]

TigerPulse: 100%

Posts: 8846

Joined: 10/31/10

Apr 8, 2024, 12:06 PM [ in reply to Re: You stand up against slavery and sit idle thinking about what people who... ]

I'm gonna back you on that, in a very, very, limited circumstance. It's a considered statement. And to be filed under the "never say never" category. My example is Shindler's Jews.

If those Jews had their 'freedom' in Nazi Germany, they'd be dead. And if they were slaves, under maybe anyone else than Oskar Schindler, they'd be dead. But because they were slaves they lived, and Oskar did the moral thing by buying them to be slaves, in order to protect them, to live. And they loved him for it.

Morality is tough. And 99.999 percent of the time my barometer is "Are both parties consensual?" And 99.999 percent of the time, that's not true in slavery. In Schindler's case, he didn't ask for their consent to be free, or slaves. He just bought them, to save them.

Morality is tough. For instance, is it moral to give a child a vaccine when they most certainly do not want the shot, and thus are not consensual?

Or, is it moral to force an adult from their home, when they will most assuredly die from a flood? They are surely not consenting either. Morality can be perilous ground, especially when one does not know all the factors involved in a situation. It's not always a slam dunk.

Like 'Mr. Gitts' trying to save someone and getting them killed in the process.

flag link

military_tech

thumb_down

thumb_up

>I’m just saying that has no bearing on a Christian today.

The only claim I'm making is that it means the bible has/had flawed morals. I never said or implied it told Christians today to own slaves. The very fact that christians today are appalled by the idea of owning humans showed that the bible allowed something morally appalling at one time.

>From the view point of the Israelites who it was written to, it was a command to treat slaves better than they were being treated. It must be judged from that view point IMO.

But it doesn't just do that. The message isn't "treat your slaves better". Did you skip the verse I just posted? It says you don't get a fine if you beat them with a rod as long as they don't die because they are your property.

A direct and clear contradiction to your claim.

>You’re basically making an argument from silence that because the book of Leviticus doesn’t outlaw slavery it is morally corrupt.

That's not what an argument from silence is. Especially when it explicitly condones it, that's the opposite of an argument from silence.

Whew

Post your comments in the thread, simple-minded...***

This, but unironically***

You stand up against slavery and sit idle thinking about what people who...