On May 26, 2024, Mitchell Holman wrote
(in article <XnsB17ED1D306A93629555@185.151.15.190>):

> Robert <robert@no.way> wrote in
> news:0001HW.2C040E2200021B7730EE6438F@news.eternal-september.org:
>
> > On May 26, 2024, El Kabong wrote
> > (in article<hmd75jdlcsh5v6qddb0l4jqct32ohkj4vj@4ax.com>):
> >
> > > Robert wrote:
> > > > On May 26, 2024, El Kabong wrote
> > > > > Robert wrote:
> > > > > > On May 26, 2024, Mitchell Holman wrote
> > > > > > > Creon <creon@creon.earth> wrote in
> > > > > > > > On Sun, 26 May 2024 12:25:17 +1000, Maximus wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > if we abandon fact based thought in favor of religious
> > > > > > > > > notions there's no telling were it will lead. that's why
> > > > > > > > > I say embracing religious ideas is perilous and unwise.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > ''
> > > > > > > > The Bible is not greater than conscience and reason. They
> > > > > > > > are directly from God, God's voice heard plainly in the
> > > > > > > > heart, as even on Horeb, or Sinai or the mount of
> > > > > > > > transfiguration. Nothing can be superior to these
> > > > > > > > instructors. The Bible may agree with reason, utter
> > > > > > > > the same sentiments with conscience; and so far it will
> > > > > > > > authority. It can never contradict these counselors, and
> > > > > > > > yet claim obedience. What God has made cannot be unmade by
> > > > > > > > any power short of his own; so nothing arbitrary or
> > > > > > > > capricious can ever become binding on reason and
> > > > > > > > conscience, let it be taught on what external authority it
> > > > > > > > may. One chief merit of Christianity consists in restoring
> > > > > > > > natural morality and natural religion to their original and
> > > > > > > > proper place,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Slavery, incest, polygamy, mass murder = "Natural morality"?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > First you need to know what you are talking about, and
> > > > > > understand without throwing shade.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > All “slavery” is not what you think, and yes, there is a
> > > > > > bad side which
> > > > > > left to the natural man often is evil and corrupt,
> > > > > > Incest is always evil, and of the sin nature.
> > > > > > Polygamy, freely done of free will, there was a time and a
> > > > > > place for it. Murder in any form is just as evil.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > When a man sells his daughter as a slave, she
> > > > > > > will not be freed at the end of six years as the
> > > > > > > men are.
> > > > > > > Exodus 21:7-11
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This was done for economic reasons, and was not the type of
> > > > > > slavery most think of as overblown by evil people. This was a
> > > > > > willing indenture, like when
> > > > > > you went to work for any employer. At that time it could be for
> > > > > > a shorter time, long enough to pay off the debt, but no longer
> > > > > > than the years that the
> > > > > > Law allowed. Which ensured fair play. This is a far more
> > > > > > complicated topic that this brief explanation, and yes, I know
> > > > > > that most people do not get it.
> > > > > > But many sell themselves as indentured employees in order to
> > > > > > feed and clothe
> > > > > > their families instead of opting to die prematurely of
> > > > > > starvation or freeze
> > > > > > to death. This was also common in the early days of America
> > > > > > regardless of race. Even in the biblical times many
> > > > > > “slaves” could buy back their freedom from the monies
> > > > > > earned for their work. Some never opted out, content
> > > > > > to work for their living and get a little spending money on top
> > > > > > of all the other benefits provided them. Bigots will never
> > > > > > understand what I am saying,
> > > > > > and they would be the same type of people who would treat their
> > > > > > slaves poorly and beat them, like they do here with their harsh
> > > > > > words and bad attitudes.
> > > > >
> > > > > So you are a defender and apologist for slavery.
> > > >
> > > > I wouldn’t put it that way at all. I just understand the various
> > > > meanings for the one English word called slavery.
> > >
> > > No, there aren't "various meanings" for slavery. A slave
> > > is a person who is owned by another person, a practice
> > > which you obviously condone.
> >
> > https://www.antislavery.org/slavery-today/
> >
> > https://www.antislavery.org/slavery-today/modern-slavery/
> >
> > https://www.antislavery.org/slavery-today/slavery-uk/
> >
> > None of this has to do with religions.
> >
> > > > Do you work as an employee? If so, what are the does and
> > > > don’t’s of your life as an employee. What ‘carrots’ do they
> > > > dangle in front of you, what actual freedoms do you have to keep on
> > > > being an employee. Think about it.
> > >
> > > Pure hyperbole. False equivalence.
> >
> > What makes you think so? Too tired to think, or are you just another
> > frog in a pot of boiling water.
> > >
> > >
> > > > A few years back there were a group of multi-million dollar paid
> > > > football players who made a point out of their slavery by the white
> > > > man, and what they
> > >
> > > That's MX-stupid.
> >
> > Nevertheless it was well stated in the news.
> > >
> > >
> > > <snip>
> > >
> > > > > If slavery was justified in the past, don't you think
> > > > > it's still justifiable now? If not, what has changed?
> > > >
> > > > The name. Is not China the largest slave industry in the world?
> > > > What about pimps and their women?
> > > > What about employee’s and employers? What about people on the
> > > > dole? People that are slaves to their drugs of choice. What about
> > > > the countries controlled by Dictators?
> > > >
> > > > My point is, in one way or another many are slaves.
> > >
> > > I'll take that as a "yes slavery is still perfectly
> > > justified because political prisoners in Red China are
> > > forced to make plastic toys for Happy Meals."
> >
> > All forms of slavery are NOT justified, never said or intimidated that
> > it is. You just blew your cred's irretrievably also showed an
> > inability to reason.
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > Did you not read Creon's post about Parker? You are
> > > Exhibit A for putting biblical dogma above conscience.
> >
> > I don’t remember seeing it much less reading it.
> > Your rationale, as well as his, is based on bias’, if that is your
> > conclusion.
> >
> > Historically there has been many forms of slavery, slave owners,
> > treatment of Slaves, and in the Bible, Joseph was a slave in Egypt yet
> > out of that he became ruler of all of Egypt ruling with the same
> > authority as the Pharaoh that was alive at the time.
>
> Hebrews kept as slaves = bad.
>
> Hebrews keeping slaves = good.
>
> Biblical situational ethics.

Now read the Bible and find out why the difference.
>
>
> When a man strikes his male or female slave with
> a rod so hard that the slave dies under his hand, he
> shall be punished. If, however, the slave survives
> for a day or two, he is not to be punished, since
> the slave is his own property.
> Exodus 21:20-21

Who was that law for and why. Who was it that was that type of slave. You
wish to argue, then you better present a better case than you did. You know
so little about these things yet speak as if you know and understand all.