Thoughts.com Blogs - More on slavery

Posted by
RaymanT
on 2008-04-29 11:21:41


Slavery and the Bible I am a black American living in Atlanta, Georgia. I am college degreed with a MBA and work as an executive with a major corporation in Atlanta. I like other black Americans would probably had an easier time in my career if I had been born white, but I have learned in life what doesn’t kill me…makes me stronger. A preacher once told me that the sweetest water…is that water pushed through a mile of solid rock. I do not consider myself a victim. I am thankful for opportunity to achieve what I have. And yes, I am a Christian. So you ask, “How could God condone slavery”? A question birthed in ignorance and bias. Why do you think there are so many black Christian abolitionists prior to the Civil War? Abolitionists in Britain and the Colonies had a strong religious base. In the United States it had began with the Quakers and was also influenced by people converted during the Second Great Awakening led by Charles Finny in the 1830’s. Slavery, especially as seen since the its beginnings in the slave trade as early as the 1400’s…and the first slaves brought to Virginia in 1619, was an incredible evil. Some people though, have taken the Bible completely out of context. Slavery of the Old Testament was completely different than the racial slavery of the New World. Usually voluntary, individuals placed themselves in servitude to another for indebtedness, family honor, security or protection. Often tied to marriage traditions or an act of mercy in cases of extreme poverty or those left after a war, it was part of the culture of the period. Mass taking of captives as slaves at the ends of wars was done by nations and usually for building and farming. The Hebrews in Egypt for 400 years and Jews for 70 years in Babylonian captivity are examples of this. Yes, there were acts of cruelty and abuse…but those were rare in voluntary servitude. A girl taken into a family as a slave would be a burden to her master is she was not well taken cared for. Loss of virginity was a shame and dishonor to the entire family. Journeyman’s suggestion for scholarly review was excellent. Glenn Miller sure did his research. www.christian-thinktank.com/qnoslave.html One of the problems some people have is taking the Bible out of the culture in which it was written. God spoke to people of that culture, of that time, with that history and with those traditions. Individuals who were ignorant, by our standards of knowledge….superstitious…and barbaric. Just like now…God met them right where they were. As a great theologian wrote….the word of God…in the words of men. The message of the Bible is not just the final destination. It is in the journey. It is not about social reform. It is about reforming of the heart….and the rest takes care of itself.

Posted by
freethinker
on 2008-05-01 05:59:34


Why do people feel it is necesarry to name their credentials before posting? Does that mmake their opinion more valid? Also the 'excuse' that the Bible is taken out of context and/or times were different back then are defensive excuses with no substance to them. How can you take chapter after chapter out of context? People like you always say the harsh chapters are out of conext, even when they are the exact words but then go and use a single verse to declare homosexuality as evil, deviant behavior. I always did wonder why so many blacks were christians. Well before and even after the icvil war the bible was used to try and UPHOLD slavery and this was a merely 150 ago. Many got it from their 'master/owners' and many now forget how it became a part of their culture. The africans taken to the new world had other religions before taken into slavery. I don't care when, whom or why a human being becomes someone's property. I just know it is morally reprehensible. The fact that the biblical god condoned it at all not to mention had rules on how to treat them shoud give anyone pause, not to mention blacks. Some of what you say regarding slavery is true (debts owed, povert) but those not to mention taking in as slaves the losers of battles is wrong. The question is not an ignorant one, avoiding the issue itself with obvious bias defending and mininterpreting plainly written verses is ignorant. THE founding father, Thomas Paine, split his friendship with George Washington over Washington's owning of slaves. He was a staunch bolitionist, and at his funeral only six attended for he had burned all his bridges with his cause for banning slavery. Two of them were black. Paine also did not believe in the bible. Why do I use Paine as an example? Because he was the most influential man responsible for the formation of America? No. I do because his religious friends that he split with all used the bible as a defense of slavery. It doesn't matter if you are born into it, be on a losing side of batte and being made one, paying off a debt (often paid by selling a son or daughter) etc. If god did write the bible through man as you claim, why did he not ban it outright? Why isn't 'thou shalt not own another person as you would cattle' in the ten commandments but be nice to mom and dad is? If the bible was written for a different timr and culture then who are you and other Christians to decide which parts apply not and which do not? According to almost all Christians, even some oh the ten commandments are not applicable today. Don't you think an almighty creator could have the foresight to know his book would be used to hold up slavery for many years after people with strong morals said, this is wrong and the because the bible says it is ok is no excuse. The bible explicitly, WORD FOR WORD talks about BUYING slaves. Wordplay and twisting of the verses doesn't change that. Just like Lev. 26 says exactly, that the children of the owned slaves is the master's property as well. How can you argue with the EXACT words of your god? Are you saying god lied? That he meant it was okay back then but not now and he just forgot to put a time limit on it? As a blackman, you were either raised in the church and never paid thought to the many verses of slavery seldom read in church or are somehow mistaken in interpreting the bible is aginst slavery. A people that were enslaved less than 200 years ago, a slavery codoned by the bible, should not only remember the one defense for slavery the south had, they should not pass down the religion of their former masters.

Posted by
freethinker
on 2008-05-08 00:02:48


no reply? As I thought. Go back to the black chirch and sing the same songs the slave owners taught you to sing 150 year ago. People talk of Reperation???? How about abandoning the culture that kept you enslaved for hundreds of years. The fact that I am Jewish and you are Black does not give you an automatic pass here as far as black issues go. You could cuban and be just as wrong. The fucked up thing is thst you are not, you forget your history and your pride and if anyone is more anti-slavery and against the owning of other humans, it would have to be me. If you can't JUSTIFY the EXACT words of those scriptures without 'interpreations' or what 'god meant' or even 'back then it was normal', then go back to church, read John and the nice parts and forget slavery ever happened.

Posted by
RaymanT
on 2008-05-11 06:32:27


I guess I mention my credentials, not just because I have some...and you don't, but because I have had to work harder to get them.. And I am thankful to have had the opportunity to achieve what I have for my family. You mention context and yet you refuse to note the time, the culture, the traditions, or to define what you call slavery. I have lived all my life with racial discrimination. I have lived in the effects of racial slavery in this country. You DO take the biblical slavery out of context. By your definition...a person placing himself under servitude to another, where if he leaves he can be placed in prison, where he is under the control of another for a specific period...is slavery. Actually I just described the US Military. (I was Army) History is full of people that have perverted and twisted the scriptures to justify evil. You still have not figured out that the Bible has NOTHING to do with social reform. It has everything to do with a reformation of the heart. Slavery (Servitude…both voluntary or involuntary) was part of the culture of those times…just like marriage rituals where they would sell their daughters….. or a person placing themselves as a slave to another for payment of debt or to repay an act of honor. To compare the racial slavery of the New World to Biblical slavery could not be more out of context. Your perspective is clouded by your obvious religious bigotry. If you had a choice between those that remained after wars or those in poverty of being taken as slaves….or dying. I guess you would prefer death. And that was the way it was. Biblical slavery was often an act of mercy. Bringing them into their own clan or family. It was in biblical slavery that Joseph was raised to a position of authority next to Pharaoh himself and in that position saved his family from famine. It was in slavery that the Hebrew children grew into a great nation in Goshen until delivered by another slave…Moses…who had been an adopted Prince of Egypt. God did not “approve” of the terrible actions of the Egyptians on their Hebrew slaves…but used it to temper them and prepare them for their deliverance. Ruth was a Moabite, who’s Jewish husband had died. All she had was her mother-in-law, Naomi. She placed herself under voluntary servitude to her husbands near kinsman, Boaz to “redeem” her. Her story is one of courage, loyalty and faith. And she became a direct linage to the Messiah. Don’t try to compare modern racial slavery from that in the Bible…unless you have any idea of what you are talking about.

Posted by
freethinker
on 2008-05-11 17:40:26


Just to clarify, you think slavery is okay when time and culture permit it? Quote "You mention context and yet you refuse to note the time, the culture, the traditions, or to define what you call slavery". The you play the rasism card, as if to day you have a higher ground to stand on morally whn it comes to the topic of rasicism. I don't play my Jew card and we were slaves/murdered/gassed/genocide/etc. Just a few decades ago so please, enough with the 'I have dealt with it shit'. Some people are dicks, get used to it. Fat people, Skinny people. every culture can claim discrimination but don't use yours a s some get out of jail free card when it comes to slavery. Your version of slavery is obviously ignorant and wrong. To consider joining the military to the buying of a human for certain years as the same thing is fucking ridiculous. I like how you use the "God did not “approve” of the terrible actions of the Egyptians on their Hebrew slaves…but used it to temper them and prepare them for their deliverance." So he doesn't approve, makes no effort to help, he just wants them to be tougher. Sounds like a dick to me. But since I know it is a fairy tale it sounds like a dickhead genie. Also, you use two or three examples of how kind the Jews were by accepting slaves rather than killing them after conquering a nation. Hmmmmm, how about let em go? There is NO excuse, biblical, present day, past day, any day that ownership of another human being is just and merciful. As a black man you should be ashamed of yourself. With your line of thinking your people should have been slaves to work off the debt it took to transport them here. And My FINAL point. Is if your logic and excuses are all based in that was the way it was in that time, doesn't that make you think the book is a bit outdated, wrote for a different time and is no longer applicable now? Probably not. Go back to making excuses for slavery, sing songs the masa's taught their 'negro' slaves and read the same book that the southern men QUOTEDED word for word to justify keeping your people in chains for centuries. Owning a human disgusts me. Selling a child disgusts me. Having a set of years to be owned (and beat) by an OWNER disgusts me. Make your excuses. But you know what, mr. educated black man, you sound like the racist here, not me. An apologist for slave owners in biblical times and an apologist for the bible being used to promote slavery. Owning a person, now or in the bible is the same thing (except in the bible there were rules on how bad you could beat them!) So Unless you read up on your 'heritage' or at least Leviticus, Exodus and Deut., go back to pretenting you are being persecuted okay.

Posted by
RaymanT
on 2008-05-12 05:57:58


The people are right on this site. You really don’t get it. I understand racism. Unlike you, I have lived through it all my life. I have felt the pain of bigotry and hate. And yet its funny…you…a little uneducated white boy, are the one pulling the race card just because you are incapable of thinking outside of a one dimensional historical perspective. I also understand history is written by people of that time..through their experiences and cultures. I am not an apologist for slavery whether during the Biblical period or any other time in history, but I am not so ignorant or so have had my reason so blinded by religious hatred and bigotry, like you, that I cannot see the obvious differences in cultures and history. Do you believe having sex with a 12 year old girl is right? Of course not! In our culture we would say it is depravity, but thousands of years ago it was a cultural norm. What do you think of an absolute monarchy? We see it today as intolerable. Total forced subjection to another with no individual rights except as given by the monarch. But if you were to ask one of those subjects…it would all depend on whether he was a good king…or a bad king. The Bible never encouraged slavery…it just was written during a time when various types of servitude was a part of the culture of that society. The Bible does not address changing of cultural norms or social reform. It deals with the changing of the human heart…and then the changed man…makes those social reforms. Mans society becomes a reflection of his spiritual growth. The Bible deals with relationships…between God and man…and between each other. Moses wrote in Exodus 21:16, “He that stealeth a man and selleth him or if he be found in his hand, he shall surely be put to death”. Solomon writes in Proverbs 3:31: “Envy thou not the oppressor, and choose thou none of his ways”. Isaiah writes, “Is not this the fast I have chosen, to loose the bands of wickedness, to undo the heavy burdens, and to let the oppressed go free, and that ye break every yoke.?” It was those who looked at the Bible as just a bunch of facts, stories and history…who had never allowed God to change their hearts…who twisted the scriptures to justify incredible evil. This slavery of the New World was not an act of mercy to bring impoverished into your home or to save you from an enemies death after a war. It was not part of cultural marriage traditions or a payment of debt or honor. It was racial evil. Families torn apart, torture, oppression, rape and death. It was for the financial gain of the elite. Do you have any idea of how incredibly foolish you sound? From your language and your inability to reason, I assume you are not just uneducated your not very bright. Have you ever read any books in Theology so you could begin to understand the message of the scriptures rather than taking little bits and pieces away from the context in which they were written. You hold several pieces of a puzzle and complain that they make no sense…and yet refuse to stand up and put the pieces with the rest to get a whole picture. Would you say that Socrates, Aristotle, Virgil, Cicero…etc..etc.. are all “a bit outdated”, “written for a different time and no longer applicable”? I am not stupid enough to think that. You might be. And lastly…you know nothing of my heritage but what you have picked up on one liners on an internet site. One of the earliest abolitionists was abducted some 1,500 years ago from Britian and enslaved by invading marauders. He eventually escaped and years later would return to this land to share his faith in Christ and to fight the evil of slavery. This young Briton named Patricius died an Irishman named Patrick. I know my heritage whether as a Christian or as a black man. You know neither. Read some Fredrerick Douglass or some of the many black Christian abolishionists and maybe you can learn something.

Posted by
freethinker
on 2008-05-12 12:02:33


While I'll let the 'uneducated white boy' who is pu;lin a 'race card' pass from Mr. Huxtable over here. I will point out a common theme in his diatribes, one he probably doesn't even see. Evolution. We EVOLVE as a race. Sure in the 3000 some odd years we have physically changed much, but look at the cultures. He says slavery was accepted then, so it's all good with him. We then EVOLVED and learned it was wrong. Having sex with minors was okay (and still is with some mormons ;) ) but we EVOLVED. Now notice god didn't insitute these changes. We did. In fact, in the bible god apporved marriage of young preteen girls and slavery. Our own set of morals have changed that. Of course I would say some of Plato, Socratesand Aristole's work is outdated and wrong, who doesn't? We learn and grow from it, not discard it. But we don't take Plato and Aristotle's writings as commandments on how to live do we, so a stupid comparison really. So to close Cliff, humans morals have improved the world bit by bit, bypassing what your little book says and ignoringing more and more parts woth each year. The number of atheists and agnostics is growing, sadly not among the black population because the, in general, religion is highest in poor uneducated areas. But it is still growing. People reading this book of murder, incest, slavery and other horrors are getting just as disgusted as me, like I imagine Fredrick Douglas would be at you for presuming to know what he thought of biblical slavery. I can provide the EXACT QUOTES and verses from the bible. All you can offer is a) different culture so it was cool and b) out of context. OR he doesmy favorite and brings out the sciptures that contradicts one another (of which thereis a WHOLE list). Because Lev. states CLEARLY you can buy slavs from other nations and own them as property. Nothing in there about debts or other bullshit excuses he has. And how gods words that are written exactly can be out of context is a mystery to me and many other other writers but hey, whatever excuse works for you.

Posted by
Unamuno
on 2008-05-15 02:36:52


Hi Freethinker. (and RaymanT) You somehow missed the whole of what RaymanT said. Cultures DO evolve and change. Sometimes better…sometimes worse. Change is not always positive. RaymanT like the rest of us civilized, western influenced, homo sapien bipeds…think slavery is an abominable evil. He has lived through it. But to realize that at that time in history it was part of their culture is to understand its evolution. If you want to be a freethinker…think outside the box. Outside of your cultural perspective and history to a barbaric time when that particular tradition was normal and acceptable to both parties. Now that did not mean there was not abuse…especially as you got to some particular cultures….like Rome. But biblical slavery was not Alex Haley’s roots. And it was not racially motivated. You said,” Why did they not just let them go after a war?” Probably the same reason we don’t let everyone loose from Guantanamo. So is it more merciful for a family to take you in as a servant…or a soldier to execute you. And actually there is a great surge right now in the United States within various religious mindsets, especially in Christianity. Most churches have had a 40% growth in the last 5 years. You still don’t get it that Bible has nothing to do with social reform…then or now. It met man right where he was….and still does. Look at Buddhism or Hinduism. A changed man can change the world.

Posted by
freethinker
on 2008-05-15 09:47:48


You are totally right (except for the reference to rayman living through anything, he has hardly had to deal with slavery in his lifetime). And I do agree that was cultural. I do agree civilizations evolve and change and what is socially acceptable often changes, even total opposite sides in a single year. But I don't think religion gets to use that pass. If it is going to be used to do decide what is morally right and acceptable then it positions and past positions need to be questioned and examined. Is it right? If you believe what you are saying, and I think you do, then you must acknowledge things like homosexuality which was socially acceptable and then became unacceptable in the past few hundred years and is now becoming socially acceptable again. Religion almost always follows civilizations on what is acceptable and on how that culture evolves (ie. womens suffrage, etc.). Homosexuality is often reviled and directly attacked by religion, especially Islam and Christianity, though ironically both religions are full of prominent leaders who are discovered to be hyporitical homosexuals. So religion can't be used as the tool to lead civilizations as it evolves. Like with slavery where the bible was used as a force to KEEP it in pracice and is now being used as a tool to decide issues like abortion and homosexuality, it needs to be acknlowledged for what it is, an outdated guide to what used to be socially acceptable and not a template for what is acceptable now. So while I think I need to be openminded and judge things differently through different viewpoints, I do not believe religion gets to be able to tell me the final decision on what is wrong and right.

Posted by
Unamuno
on 2008-05-17 00:24:40


Hi Freethinker. In response here are a few thoughts. In fact ,usually civil laws follow religious precepts. “Man is like water….he seeks his lowest levels”. As the civilization becomes more depraved they continue to reinterpret the laws to fit their morality until the civilization collapses and the laws collapse upon them. Ie..Persia, Greece and Rome. Famous dictators did not go to the people to change laws…he went to judges who legislated from the bench without consent of the governed. The Bible fits a number of categories from “ceremonial law”, “cultural law” and what I call “lasting principle”. Slavery was a cultural immaturity which eventually Christians…and those of the western (Judeo/Christian) worldview had to eventually deal with as it directly contradicted those “lasting principles” of mutual respect, loving your neighbor as yourself, and God NOT being a respecter of persons. Other issues. Homosexuality. Regardless of what some individuals in the community of scientists have published that supports the “politically correct” Holy Cow of science…..true homosexual conduct in the natural world is not that prolific. Seen more in captivity with its unnatural changes in their environment, what appears to be same sex behavior is usually either a show of dominance, sensory confusion and identification or an instinctual hormonal overload (IHO). A dog may hump your leg, a tree stump, another male or a stuffed animal. It is not that he has a sexual desire for your leg. It is IHO. One associate of mine calls it “instinctual horniness overload”. We have all experienced that at one time or another. As a matter of fact if a female is present… your dog will quickly forget about another male or your leg. I am quite familiar with the studies of JBS Haldane and observational studies of Bruce Bahemihl, as well as others but do not agree with most their statistical analysis or conclusions. And even though there are some species that have a homosexual bonding, like dolphins or the ostrich, the actual occurrence of sexual contact is minimal. Ultimately, the only purpose of gender is reproduction of the species. Otherwise we might reproduce through parthenogenesis. Population of a species is a delicate balance between production of offspring and death through accident, disease, predators and environmental changes. If homosexual behavior was more “prominent”, being non-offspring producing, the resulting imbalance would result in an extinction of the species. Also the accompanying increase of diseases as a result of the behavior (fecal contamination, intestinal parasites and other STD’s) would further imbalance the birth and death ratio’s. The Bible does not approach this as a “cultural issue” but as a violation of natural law with consequences. That is why even as a society becomes more depraved in its sexual behavior…homosexuality, bestiality, necrophila..etc…the Biblical standard does not change. Historically we see as a civilization comes into decline…..sexual depravity becomes accepted as “normal behavior”. It does not take to much longer for the society to reach its demise with both collapse of family units and rampant diseases. The Bible says “woman was made for man…and man for woman”. Also it is interesting that as we talk of man “evolving”, we still try to excuse behavior by linking him to non-sentient, non reasoning species further down the evolutionary ladder. Abortion. Another non-cultural “stand” by Christianity and other world religions. As a biologist I agree that when “life” actually begins is more in the purview of the theologian but I can determine life both on a biological and clinical level. Interestingly enough clinical death (in a human) is a lack of heartbeat and biological death is the absence of brainwave activity. (I had both of these discussions at length with Journeyman recently) If a person is not dead….then logically he must be alive. But is that the case with a child in the womb (fetus)? In today’s world political correctness determines whether the fetus is alive or not. At 50 days the human fetus has both a heartbeat and early brain stem activity….and yet they continue to terminate the life of the child all the way into third trimester. Can you think of other periods in history when humans were considered non-human by legal fiat? I can think of few things as barbaric as partial birth (big baby) abortion. Yet if did the same thing to a cat, you would find yourself facing criminal prosecution. It is again amazing the number of non-sentient species on this planet where the unborn are considered to have value and are protected by law. Lobsters, praying mantis, eagles…etc. Man mankind has no worth. An easy step if one see’s man as strictly an accidental result of random molecular cohesion.

Posted by
freethinker
on 2008-05-17 14:05:35


Interesting response and well written. Homosexuality, while not the dominant sexual desire in almost all species is still undeniably present. And you must admit it has been present in mankind since it's earliest recorded history. In Epic stories of Athens and Sparta from sailors of the coastal shores and present day into the very center of Western faith, the Catholic church, homosexuality is always a lurking presence in the background. While you and I may agree that it is neither desirable nor productive, is it our place to discriminate against people who do desire it? The argument that it has been the one of the symptoms of a decline in morality which precedes the fall of whichever civilization is being discussed is a straw man and one viewed only from a certain perspective. One could easily say that a change in religion destroys civilization faster than any moral shift does. Remember, it was a moral shift when we allowed the black culture to attain freedom. A step forward and against the tide of religion. The Roman empire's decline can be debated for books on end so I'll just say there is ample evidence the influx of mulitple beliefs, of which Christianity happened to be the one that stuck, was a major factor in its fall. Abortion. A gray area currently but also one practiced throughout recorded time. Even when it becomes a moot issue you will find religions and civilizations alike of the past killing babies born with deformities or other minor birth defects. And those babies are out of the womb. Killing a fetus, an un'knowing' life is much more gray than that, I admit. But if there is no soul and by default there is no 'knowing' as a fledging life in the womb, it cannot at all be decided as murder. Not to mention a decision by a group who would send grown men out to die for their beliefs, Muslims and Christians alike, but yet flich at the termination of an undesirable group of cells is hardly one that can claim the moral highground. I'll admit I used to find abortion horrible. My parents, when I was growing up made me watch videos of fetuses being disposed of and they would push it into my head that horrible, bloody murders were being carried out everyday by non-believers each day. Ironically they wouldn't let me watch Rambo but a live fetus being sucked out in pieces was fine viewing for a twelve year old (and yet people don't realize where and why they believe their convictions to be from). I now do not care who is homosexual. I do not care who has an abortion. My personal tastes who be not being attracted to neither homosexuals nor a girl having muliple abortions but I wonder if these tastes are because my upbringing or my genes. I doubt I'll ever know because I don't see those tastes changing but I would wager my upbringing. I can see one having an opinion on the two topics. I can see one arguing a point on the two. But I cannot agree with pushing the beliefs of shame and guilt on those who do decide to pursure those actions.

Posted by
Unamuno
on 2008-05-18 02:18:08


First, As you study history you will finding in the collapse of ALL civilizations, a decline in morality. Civilization gives way to barbarity. It is almost a form of societal “entropy”. This not an opinion based upon a perspective. That which was virtuous and moral is replaced by depravity and immorality. Second. Think about your statement…”While you and I may not agree that it is neither desirable nor productive, is it our place to discriminate against people who desire it?” Should we now not speak out against incest, child rape, beastiality, etc., because we are “discriminating” against that behavior? Thomas Jefferson said, “The purpose of government is to preserve good”. If it is counter productive or destructive to an individual or the society, then of course, which choose to preserve the virtues of civilized behavior. Second the lack of religion …or the abuse of religion adds in the decline of a society. Your statement is non-sequetor and based on religious bigotry. The fall of Rome was the influx of barbarism and lead poisoning. Christianity actually saved the empire by restoring a central leadership and law. I recommend “The Fall of the Roman Empire: A New History of Rome and the Barbarians”, by Peter Heather. Also it was a moral shift that brought the end to racial slavery in the United States but that "shift" was a return to the moral high ground of the Christian faith. See the writings of great Christian abolishionists like: Charles Finney, Lyman Beecher, Harriet Beecher Stowe and William Lloyd Garrison. Your comment on Abortion is also without merit. How have you determined a child in the womb has “no soul”? The only difference between a child in the womb and outside the womb is the way they breath and eat. Are we now going to execute everyone on breathing apparatus and IV? Christianities stance upon the sanctity of life and protection of the most helpless in our society is both courageous and appropriate. You cannot determine the rightness or wrongness of an issue by the application of historical extremes.

Posted by
freethinker
on 2008-05-18 09:19:39


"incest, child rape, beastiality, etc." are hardly on the scale of someone being attracted to same sex and it is ignorant to think so. In fact, it is opinions like that which are pushing the country farther to the left each day with their homophobic attitude. Your opinion on abortion and the human body having a soul is nothing more than that, an opinion. One that runs against the tide of reasonable thinking and one that declares it has won when all evidence points to the contrary. If there is a god, I doubt he would care about a soul getting sent right back to the 'soul bank' he keeps up there. He would be to busy killing children with a consicious mind, emotion and self-awareness. Christianities stance on abortion is hypocritical like almost all it's other stances and outdated. It weeps when a fetus is aborted but has no qualms about killing or condemning to eternal death people who believe differently. I think Christianity's god is to busy fawning over achivements like the Black Plague, Small Pox and Cancer to find sorrow in his magical little heart to weep for the termintation of a fetus. He tells his little followers he loves them and will protect them but when they get sick who do they turn towards? Did you say science?? Your thoughts on Slavery are even more ignorant. Christianity took the 'moral high ground'? Slavery was rooted in Christianity and had been a Christian tradition for over a millenium. Christians fought tooth and nail over the abolition of slavery. Sure while you may find many Christian abolutionists, you'll find even more Christians turned atheists over the topic. Speaking of moral high ground, I quite like the challenge Hitchens put forward. "Name me an ethical statement made or an action performed by a believer that could not have been made or performed by a non-believer." Kinda hard huh? The assertion that religion owns the moral high ground is offensive, ignorant and superstitious. Religion is the bane of morality and if history was looked at without the foggy glasses and ignorant gaze of religious converts then the heinious deeds and traditions upheld by numerous religions, Christianity more than most, it is quite easy to see why people with higher IQ's and more education are likely to be non-religious. People in poverty and people who lack in things like education are more likely to believe in magical beings like god who lovey loves them oh so much..... In a hundred years we will look back on the treatment of homosexuals and topics like abortion just like we look back on things like slavery and incest (biblical well before anyplace like West Virginia was ever even discovered) is looked back on now. Just like now there will be people like you who say Christians were against mistreatment or judging homosexuals. They will probably list the numerous religious figure found with their finger up a man's ass. Any ignorant and superstitious group of people who thought things like sperm wasting was a horrible act of murder not so long ago has no business telling anyone how they should live their life. If the religious folk worried about saving their own soul and keeping themselves from raping children, incest, murder, etc. instead of declaring with false importance and mystical communication that deeds like wacking off were the devil's mind corupting our own, maybe they would be taken with a bit more seriousness when legislating or judging.

Posted by
freethinker
on 2008-05-18 09:30:32


I forgot the second half of Hitchens challenge. Name one immoral or unethical act that can only be done by someone religious or a believer. I can think of ten in less than a minute.

Posted by
RaymanT
on 2008-05-20 01:25:58


You still don’t get it. Think. You are using the same argument the proponents of slavery used to try and justify the evils of slavery and their racial bigotry…..but you are trying to use it to support your religious bigotry. They said that slavery was justified because it was in the Bible and that God did not speak against it. You use the same argument but to try and push your viewpoint that the Bible is evil…..and so is God. The fact is the Bible never addresses social reform. It is about meeting man wherever he is, and changing the heart. The changed man…changes the world. It was as these black (and white) Christian abolitionists came to grips with the fact that the slavery of the Bible was in a different culture, a different time, for different purposes….that it was not only NOT the same and that this evil of slavery was in direct contradiction to the teachings of Christ…..the abolitionist became a true force for change. Christians once again stood on the “moral high ground”. And what was that? The teaching of Christ that Thomas Jefferson admired so much. “Love thy neighbor”, Do unto others as you would have them do unto you”, God is no respecter of persons”, “Be ye kind to one another, tenderhearted..” Olavdah Equiano in Britain, Frederich Douglass, Harriet Tubman, Samuel Sharpe..and later Booker T. Washington, all understood this and their voices added to those of Charles Finney, Levi Coffin and Harriet Beecher Stowe. Read some of the sermons of Sojourner Truth (1797-1883). She was called the “Lords Colored Preacher”. Rev Martin Luther King used some of her sermons in his early speeches. William Lloyd Garrison (another great abolitionist) published a book entitled: “The Narrative of Sojourner Truth; A Northern Slave”, in 1850. I have it in my collection but I am sure you could find it in the local library.

Posted by
Unamuno
on 2008-05-20 05:26:53


Sorry for the delay in this reply. Finals were last week and I am finishing grading some papers. Freethinker. You are doing it again. Acting the child. When you have no substance in a reply you result to name calling and irrationalism. This is where not only your lack of education shows…but your perceiving of the world through fogged eyes of religious bigotry and ignorance. From your language and lack of knowledge I would assume you are both ill-bred and unread. (No offense Journeyman…but it can be irritating. A combination of insolence, arrogance and ignorance. Let’s look at your “points”. Did I say that “homosexuality was perceived either by civil or moral law as on the same scale as “incest, child rape or bestiality”? No I did not. I merely pointed out that they are behaviors that one should (both individually or corporately) speak out against as they, as you would say, are “neither desirable or productive”. Man is the one who places levels of severity regarding both the effects and punishment. If you were a Bushman in Australia, killing someone is considered a far inferior crime than telling a lie. The point is…they are both are considered “immoral” behavior. The Bible accurately depicts homosexuality as a violation of natural law, especially if we look at man as an evolving species. If you believe in the concept of Natural Selection, then homosexuality, as a non-producer, has no inherent advantage and its frequency should diminish as species evolves. I am sorry that the Bible does not “redefine” is scriptural principles with each society so that everyone feels nice, warm and fuzzy. Placing racial discrimination on the same level as homosexuality is typical of most liberal mental processes. Race is a genetic trait. It is who you are. No evidence has been shown, even after the genome project, that homosexuality…is anything but what you do….not who you are. Yes, some people have a tendency toward that behavior…much like addictive personalities…but ultimately it is a choice. Although an agnostic, I love your comments on Christians having lower IQ’s and education. I imagine Christians would feel terrible about being in the same category as Issac Newton, Niel Bohr, Louis Pasteur, Galileo, Kepler, Copurnicus, Maxwell, Max Plank, Werner Hesenberg, Marie Curie, Enrico Fermi..etc..etc. And these are just a few famous committed Christians. Like Thomas Jefferson, I have a deep respect of the message of Jesus Christ. And, no offense, I probably have twice your IQ. I also enjoy your quotes of Christopher Hitchens. His love of Trotsky and his viewpoint of history shaped by Marxism, I am sure affected his fanatical antitheist and anti religious philosophies. As he quotes from Karl Marx often, “Religion is the opiate of the masses.” A great person to think of a mentor, don’t you think? Grabors book accurately describes his “cultural illiteracy and ignorance based upon a deep seeded hatred and bias” of primarily “Abrahamic” religions. I agree with Journeyman that he would qualify for the “spiritual retardation” category. Yes, he is brilliant, when it comes to understanding the world politic, American foreign policy and the nature of “Islamic fascism”. He has done some excellent work, but unfortunately much of his work, such as his book “God is not Great; How Religion Poisons Everything” is an perfect example of factual ambiguity, historical inaccuracies and just “sloppy” research as filtered through the lens of atheistic Marxism….and delirium tremors. You quoted Hitchen’s challenge..”Name me an ethical statement made or an action performed by a believer, that could not have been made or performed by a non-believer.” It would take an individual suffering from “spiritual retardation” to come up with this one. I am not a theologian, but I can even think of several just off hand. Jesus said, “But love ye your enemies, and do good, and lend, hoping for nothing again, and your reward shall be great, and ye shall be the children of the Highest; for he is kind unto the unthankful and to the evil”. Wow. That pretty well is the opposite of the natural man. How about, “Bless them which persecute you, bless and curse not.” How about, Matthew 10:8, “Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast out devils, freely ye have received, freely give.” Wow…not to many non-believers doing that either. Shall I go on….”ad Infinitium”. Sorry…”mea cuplia”. RaymonT pretty well summed up your lack of understanding of new world slavery. Keep watching Oprah in “Roots”. Or you can read some of the authors he suggested. Frederich Douglass does have some great written works I think you would enjoy. I read Sojourner Truth back in college. An incredible woman. The rest of your comments fall into the category of ignorant, bigoted rambling and deserve no comment at all.

Posted by
DrSteve
on 2008-05-21 00:51:58


Just a note….to jump into the fray. Dr Unamuno never brought up the “soul” regarding abortion. You did. (Read the blog) He merely explained, accurately that life can be determined both on a biological and clinical level. Does a child in the womb have a soul? At what point does “life” begin? These questions have been asked since the beginning. By the way, there is no “soul bank”. Do you understand any Christian theology? Even as a physician, I seldom use the term “fetus” as it attempts to de-humanize the child in the womb…who could very possibly be a patient. Mary was with child…not with fetus. When I am with a pregnant patient, I might ask, “How is the baby?” Not how is the tissue? What I do know is that we are more than the sum of our parts. We are more than mere electrical impulses and active synapses. Every scientist and physician that I have ever worked with has believed that. They may not be able to define it. They may not attach it to a religious dogma or terminology. But I have looked in the eyes of those who left this earth…..and saw that point when that “light” of life left their eyes. Don’t you see conflict when on one side of the hospital, surgeons are working to repair the heart of a tiny human patient in the womb of his/or her mother. And on the other side of the hospital a child with the same viability is having its brain sucked out until the scull collapses so the “doctor” can pull the body of the baby out of the womb? Truly, “All that is required for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing.” We know now from the McCorvey testimony that she was not “raped” in the Wade vs Roe landmark case. We also know that the “statistics” regarding abortions prior to 1973 were contrived by those, whose agenda was to change the moral direction of a nation through judicial review as apposed to the consent of the governed. Abortion was actually was not that prevalent. There was a greater sence of individual responsibility and maturity when dealing with consequences of individual actions. But with the supreme courts decision the doors were opened to use abortion as a means of birth control. No responsibility, no accountability. When I deliver a child into the world, they are both my patients and I do everything in my power to bring them through this “miracle” healthy and whole. I have lost both mothers…and new born babies. Your comments regarding this topic are truly without merit. You again see the world through the lens of ignorance, religious bias and lack of compassion.

Posted by
journeyman
on 2008-05-21 01:12:57


Just a note: The father of medicine, Hippocrates 460-377 B.C, expressly prohibited abortion in his ethical Oath long before Christianity. The Oath originally stated in part: “I will follow that system of regimen which, according to my ability and judgment, I consider for the benefit of my patients, and abstain from whatever is deleterious and mischievous. (...) I will give no deadly medicine to any one if asked, nor suggest any such counsel; and in like manner I will not give to a woman a pessary to produce abortion.” Hippocrates saw abortion as being in direct opposition to a doctor’s role of promoting life and health.

Posted by
DrSteve
on 2008-05-22 05:37:13


Hey Journeyman. Good to hear from you.

Posted by
freethinker
on 2008-05-22 09:38:09


lol, from lack of knowledge and language? Really? Only high brow intellectuals speak what you consider to be proper language? Fuck that :) Simply saying the words homosexuality and incest in the same sentence when pointing out they are 'abnormal' behavior is the same as comparing. I like your comparisions of 'religious' figures with high IQ's.... I guess you don't read any studies done on prison population and lower class and educated people compared to people of higher educations having a greater level of disbelief. Cherry picking studies and biblical verses to match your beliefs must be nice. Oh and try reading some of what the people you listed wrote before making an ass of yourself and listing them. The farther back you go, the less the amount of non-belivers you'll find, that is certain. But only because books were burned as well as people, torture was implemented and rights were stripped away from those who didn't say daddy jesus was a ok in their book. What a nice, warm religion. You even go so far as declaring yourself an agnostic????? What a fucking joke. Agnostics are weak atheists, to afraid to have a belief or opinion and unwilling to even grasp the definition of the word atheist. I believe you said Jefferson had a deep respect for jesus christ? Really? With qoutes like these I would have to call you a fucking idiot. "The Christian god is a three headed monster; cruel, vengeful and capricious... One only need look at those who serve him. They are always two classes of people: fools and hypocrites." Or maybe this one. "CChristianity is the most perverted system ever shone on man...perverted into an engine for enslaving mankind... a mere contrivance [for the clergy] to flich wealth and power to themselves." You are welcome to steal the phrase 'spiritual redardation' if you like though. I enjoy people using oxymorons. Your example of something a religious person does that a nonbeliver can is laughable. I think someone needs to take their finals again. Then again one who openly says they are smarter is usually doing it for self-esteem issues so if it makes you feel better, go ahead. I used to have a low self esteem, when I was 6.... And please, stop with the idea that slavery was a practice the Christians found abhorrent. Same with Women's sufferage. When people like Elizabeth Cady Stanton, you know, the preeminent fighter for women's rights in US history says things like "The bible and the church have been the greatest stumbling blocks for women's emancipation... Among the clergy we find our most violent enemies, those most opposed to any change in women's position." or people like Fredrick Douglas (who you mentioned earlier, obviously drawing names from a hat, recommending his works should be read when he has obviously only read those applicable to his 'agnostic (right...) beliefs) say things like "The church is not only indifferent to the wrongs of the slaves, it actually takes sides with the oppressors.... For my part, I would say, welcome infidelity! Welcome atheism! Welcome anything! in preference to the gospel as preached by these divines! They convert the very name of religion into an engine of tyranny and barbarous cruelty, and serve to conform more infidels, in this age, than all the infidel writings of Thomas Pain, Voltaire and Bolingbroke put together have done!" it really makes your argument quite silly. And just a side note, to Journeyman who thought it high brow to quote Hippocrates, maybe he should try reading all the writings before jumping on a band wagon. Hippocrates also said "Men think epilepsy divine because they do not understand it. We will one day understand what causes it and then cease to call it divine. And so it is with all things in the universe." As far as abortion goes, anyone talking of lights leaving the body, insinuating there is a soul or spirit in our bodies THEN going on to portray himself in a scientific light, is full of shit anyways. The same people siding against homosexuals because they have so far not determined what makes people choose certain sexual prefernces, is the often the same person who is against abortion because they believe people have souls.... hmmmmm I am guessing we will find evidence of DNA coding for gays long before we find evidence of a soul. When actually thought about, which I see some here haven't done, the idea of a soul is pure nonsense. Wishful thinking and very egotistical. But maybe abortion and souls can be covered later. Nice change of topic from religion oppressing people, with things like slavery, women's oppresion to things like Jim Crow laws though.

Posted by
Unamuno
on 2008-05-23 05:03:48


Last reply to “Non-thinker”. Individuals wishing to rationality discuss topics may contact me at: unamuno. I can’t believe I have wasted this amount of time on this arrogant, insolent child with a GED who probably spends most of his time on comic books, movies and video games. An adult (at least in years) who I sure has accomplished nothing in his life , except maybe as a sperm donor. Journeyman brags about his incredible granddaughters. Obviously intelligence must have skipped a generation, in your case. Your examples of language and civility speak for themselves. Aristotle defined the art of speech both as entertaining and edifying. Boweles writes, “A superior person uses superior speech.” What you would call “high brow speech”…as opposed to your “low brow”. You have succeeded to show yourself a fool to all that have read these replies. You either have poor reading skills or are unable to comprehend most of what has been written. Your “statistics” that you pick-up on “I Hate Christians.com” are typical fare for religious bigots. You think yourself a “rationalist” and yet you disregard anything that does not fit you narrow religiously bigotry and hatred. Some of those scientists that I listed were not just Christians but extremely active in their faiths. Yes, I have always considered myself an agnostic. Although these exchanges have brought me to a deeper examination of my beliefs….and faith. For that I am grateful. An atheist is an agnostic that is “damaged” in his facilities so as to be completely unable see or think outside of their very tiny box of self-interests, self-fulfillment, self-serving worldview. He know longer is a true skeptic, but marginalizes and disregards anything that involves his perspective of empirical evidence. Thomas Jefferson did have a deep respect for Jesus Christ. I did not say he believed him to be the Son of God. Jefferson was a deist. He admired the principles expounded by Jesus. So much so that he would cut out the words of Jesus and put them together into his own synoptic study. He had a great dislike for the church and organized religion. And did not want a repeat of Britain’s “state church”. Yes, you do use oxymorons. Gk; “Oxymoros” ..or “pointedly stupid”. That would be an accurate assessment of most of the things your write. Your spelling is as poor as your understanding of the English language. Next error. I never said that the New World slavery (1400 – 1860’s) was a practice that many Christians found abhorrent. Many ministers and individuals used your argument, that the slavery in the Bible was the same thing and therefore justified it. RaymonT was right. They used that argument to try to justify their racial bigotry……and you use it to justify your religious bigotry. You have never read any of the authors RaymanT told you about. Frederick Douglass’s work, “Narrative of the Life of Frederick Douglass, an American Slave” (1845) speaks not only of his life as a slave …but his fight to become a free man. It is probably one of the most influential pieces of literature in the anti-slavery movement. He also speaks of his faith as he taught a “Sabbath school”. Douglass would later become an ordained minister in the African Methodist Episcopal Church. Frederick Douglass Christian School, (Chester, P.A.) was a christen school dedicated to his faith and love of learning. Douglass’s second wife, Helen Pitts (white woman who was his secretary), with others like Elizabeth Cady Stanton would stand together and fight for women’s rights. Frederick Douglass like many “liberation” black Christians spoke out against those who would trample both the Bible and the Constitution in there support of slavery….and his anger at those that would “highjack” the Christian faith to support that evil. That’s the context of the “one-liner” you pulled from the net. I don’t think Journeyman thought it “high-brow” to quote Hippocrates. We were discussing a medical, surgical procedure. Abortion. DrSteve can confirm this that while the oath is rarely used in its original form today, it serves as a foundation for other, similar oaths and laws that define good medical practices and morals. To compare epilepsy (a medical condition) to abortion (a very dangerous medical procedure that takes a human life), is a typical contextual error. Maybe DrSteve can give you a summary of the incredible dangers and consequences to the woman regarding abortion. He made the comment on his blog that it strange that if a 12 year old girl wants an aspirin, she has to get permission in writing from the parent, but if this same little girl enters into a legal agreement with a physician or health care professional and he performs an abortion….the only time the parent will be notified is to identify her body at the morgue. Maybe you would feel different if you are the parent who had to identify your dead daughter. You assume that anyone that believes in the “soul” is either ignorant or not a scientist. You really can’t be that stupid. But maybe you can. Well here is the grade. D-. Go back to your video games. This will be posted for my students.

Posted by
DrSteve
on 2008-05-23 05:08:58


Some think that abortion is "victimless". Besides the termination of the childs life, look at the consequences in the lives of thousands of women every year. Sterilization, hemorrhage, endotoxic shock ..as well a double the risk of later breast cancer, 2.3 relative risk of cervival cancer, uterine perforation, cervial lacerations, placenta previa, later complication in labor, ectopic pregnancy, pelvic inflammatory diease and endometritis....and many more dangerous consequences.

Posted by
freethinker
on 2008-05-23 08:19:49


lol. How the fuck (oops, those GED classes really screwed my language! lol) does one become a teacher knowing so little??? He obviously can't grasp Jefferson's thinking in that NUMEROUS writings of his that display disgust at Christianity, yes so much so that he edited chunks out when studying it or the slaves (and decades after it was banned) being persecuted DUE to biblical law, even to the point of ignoring Douglas's speeches and writings where he blasted Christianity many times (I really don't feel like writing all the quotes, maybe 'professor' here can look em up). What kind of teacher is obviously unaware of the studies of the American prison population concerning belief in religion compared to the percentage of free Americans who do not believe (0.2% compared to 13%)? What kind of teacher is so outnumbered against the establishment of education to blindly ignore the huge trampling of civil rights being pushed by religions? What kind of teacher is so ignorant that he would consider the man who discover DNA and the man who broke the atom to be 'damaged' and self absorbed in matters of thinking? What kind of teacher pretends to be agnostic when he actually looks like he is blowing the 'almighty'? None that I know thank 'god'. jesus christ if I had a teacher like that I would have dropped the class there and went on to take another and laugh with other professors on what a douchebag this asshole is. He talks about thinking outside the box but he doesn't even know the definition of atheist! Thinking it is equivalent to a religion or a belief of some kind! I'll tell you who the arrogant shit is, the person who looks up at the sky, knowing that we are a little shit of a planet, orbiting a little unimpressive star, in an unimressive part of our little galaxy and thinks 'god made all this for us!' There are over 300 billion (can he even grasp that number?) stars in our little galaxy alone, that there are trillions of galaxies, but god cares whether we masterbate, have sex with two people or look at porn.... wait, that's not arrogance, it is pure fucking stupidity. So take your pious, fake, hypocritical and foolish bullshit elsewhere. Go read a text book left behind in a biology class or grab a history book and read the number of centuries the church has declared war on knowledge, learning and human rights. Go suck off your local pastor (50/50 shot he is down with it lol) or the crucifix on your wall. Go make believe anyone who thinks differently is a high school dropout (much preferred than thinking like this oh so ingorant fuck). Keep ignoring the facts that the United States, among all other civilized nations, is almost last in all matters concerning education but first in matters like rape, murder, robbery.... oh and belief in religion and think there is no corelation between the two. Go think anyone who despises religion for the harm and damage it has caused, is causing and will cause thinks that way because he read some website that you made up. It's like talking to a grown up (maybe?) who believe in unicorns and pots of gold at the end of rainbows is not only likely but it is obvious! Speaking of comics, it is FAR more likely that a speaceship from kypton landed on Earth and superman walks among us than it is that ANY invisible, magical, inept and obviously a fuckup at his job created us and it out there blowing his load when a goat is killed on an alter or when someone in Arkansas sings hosanna's to his name. Talk about fucking ignorant. (hopefully the abundance of fucks or taking of your spacemans name in vain made you leave a few sentences ago :)

Posted by
SuzieQn
on 2008-05-23 20:33:16


Man are you a fucking idiot. I read this over twice...for entertainment value. Do you understabd anything that has been said. You probably live in a basement playing with your joystick. lol. You are not the most arogant stupid shit I have ever heard. I take it from the blogs that Journeyman is your father. Wow. I would be so ashamed to bring into the world a waste of human tissue like you. By the way..I see these men with educations, experience, and that have done something with their lives to make this world a better place, professors, biologists, Physicans, Executives.... Then there is you. A fucking turd. What a shame you are wasting our air. The only thing you have accomplished I am sure in life is letting people see the irrationality, hatred and ignorance of a religious bigot. You probably have brought more people to faith in God than any other website. That must make you feel good!! Man, Journeyman must be a saint not to not to have written you out of his life long ago. who are you to even have an opionion. Dumb, uneducated, worthless shits like you should not even be allowed to vote or speak in public. You an embarrassement to the human race. I am sorry. Am I writing to fast for you. My mother had an abortion about a year after I was born, because one of her "friends" told her...don't worry its safe...and the bably is not really human. They perferated her uterus and consequently she could never have another child. I understand I would have had a brother...except for stupid, arrogrant pieces of shit like you. I have never heard such hatred of religion in my life. What were you abused by a priest...or are you just a sociopath. People need to boycott your site...so they don't catch any mental dieases that might come over the keyboard. HEY ANYONE THAT READS THIS SITE. BEWARE THIS FUCKER IS TOXIC WASTE.