Jump to content
IGNORED

Southern Slavery Was A Okay


debrand

Recommended Posts

http://www.class.uidaho.edu/ngier/wilsononslavery.htm

I found this by accident while I was looking up opinions on Doug Wilson. He is new to me so I was curious about him.

Wow.

In Wilson's first response to "Slavery Revisited" (Moscow Pullman Daily News, Oct. 11&12), he made no corrections about his quoted comments about slavery. Here he had a chance to retract his support for slavery, but he did not do so. (In a column on November 21, he had yet another chance to retract his views.) In that article Wilson says that slavery is not a sin if the owner treats his slaves humanely. Then comes a passage, not disputed by Wilson and contained in the essay: “There has never been a multi-racial society which has existed with such mutual intimacy and harmony in the history of the world" (p. 24). This is unequivocal support for racial slavery, unless you want to make the ludicrous claim that Southerners were not racists. Besides, the U.S. at that time was a racist nation by law. Not only did the constitutional provision that blacks were partial persons make racism legal, but also the indirect voting power of slaves in apportioning congressional districts made any legislative abolition of slavery virtually impossible

by the way, here is an interesting quote from Fredrick Douglass

Were I to be again reduced to the chains of slavery, next to that enslavement, I should regard being the slave of a religious master the greatest calamity that could befall me. For of all slaveholders whom whom I have ever met, religious slaveholders were the worst. I have ever found the meanest and basest, the most cruel and cowardly, of all others. It was my unhappy lot not only to belong to a religious slaveholder, but to live in a community of such religionists."

Frederick Douglass, abolitionist, feminist, and former slave

I think that I will give more weight to Douglass' first hand account of slavery and ignore Wilson

http://www.class.uidaho.edu/ngier/Wilson.htm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Non-Duggar Josiah (Biblical Beginnings) was a big fan of Wilson and when he came here said that slavery was okay because it was in the Bible. I want to make these people be slaves for about a month and then let them see how they feel. Even if you are treated nice, you are still a slave.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Non-Duggar Josiah (Biblical Beginnings) was a big fan of Wilson and when he came here said that slavery was okay because it was in the Bible. I want to make these people be slaves for about a month and then let them see how they feel. Even if you are treated nice, you are still a slave.

I'd forgotten about him He also wanted homosexuals stoned(unless I am confusing him with someone else) It is interesting to see the connection between these various fundies

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All these morons who want slavery back and thing it's okay say that because they think they wouldn't be slaves, but the owners. They're kidding themselves if they believe that nonsense. All these people who think slavery is okay should be the ones who are forced to be slaves. Wonder how fast they'd change their minds. And Douglass was a feminist? News to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All these morons who want slavery back and thing it's okay say that because they think they wouldn't be slaves, but the owners. They're kidding themselves if they believe that nonsense. All these people who think slavery is okay should be the ones who are forced to be slaves. Wonder how fast they'd change their minds. And Douglass was a feminist? News to me.

I don't know if Douglass was a feminist or not. Did the word, feminist even exist during his lifetime? I thought that he had given speeches at some of the early suffrage meetings so maybe he could be considered a feminist?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd forgotten about him He also wanted homosexuals stoned(unless I am confusing him with someone else) It is interesting to see the connection between these various fundies

Yes, he was the one that wanted to stone gays. And then he flounced because it was pointed out that Jesus wasn't big on stoning people.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All these people who think slavery is okay should be the ones who are forced to be slaves.

Sadly, I think some of them might just say that it is their God-given lot, like a lot of fundie women, even those in the most oppressive marriages, justify their submission. :(.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Douglass was totally a feminist, as was his second wife. The word itself wasn't coined til the 1890s, but in retrospect, yeah, complete feminist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sadly, I think some of them might just say that it is their God-given lot, like a lot of fundie women, even those in the most oppressive marriages, justify their submission. :(.

Non-Duggar Josiah claimed that if he was a slave he would not fight it, not even if he was abused and saw his family abused because slaves should obey their master. I don't believe that for a second. I think non-Duggar Josiah should go be a slave for a gay couple.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sadly, I think some of them might just say that it is their God-given lot, like a lot of fundie women, even those in the most oppressive marriages, justify their submission. :(.

I don't think they would agree when they found out that at any given time they, their spouse or children could be sold away or killed by an owner's whim. Or if forced to do something out of their idea of wimmin's work or forced to do wimmin's work if a man. They would like the oppressiveness but not the actual work or loss of being able to worship, pray, or even be allowed to have feelings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't think they would agree when they found out that at any given time they, their spouse or children could be sold away or killed by an owner's whim. Or if forced to do something out of their idea of wimmin's work or forced to do wimmin's work if a man. They would like the oppressiveness but not the actual work or loss of being able to worship, pray, or even be allowed to have feelings.

Or if the owners decided to rape their sisters so that they could breed more slaves.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Slave relationships were not considered real marriages, so basically if you were a slave, you were forced to live in sin to breed children for your master. How does that fit with their notions of purity? And whatever happened to the idea that women are weak, dependent creatures who need their male authorities to help and guide them? Not much of that when you're being forced to toil in the fields all day. Slavery only works out if slaves are not considered human. But I don't know why I'm expecting any of this to make sense. If there's a single scrap of logic in any of their whackadoodle preachings, I'll toast it and eat it for breakfast.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, my fave fundie armchair historian, Lady Lydia, once said that she was sure there were some Christian lady slaves who chose to stay out of the fields and in their little slave cabins, tending house for their husbands and homeschooling their children.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, my fave fundie armchair historian, Lady Lydia, once said that she was sure there were some Christian lady slaves who chose to stay out of the fields and in their little slave cabins, tending house for their husbands and homeschooling their children.

Suuuuure they did, and I have a bridge in Brooklen to sell to her too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There is some really barbaric shit in the bible, that we as a society have moved past as we've become more civilized. Or at least I thought we had. It's really scary how blindly some people will follow ANYTHING if they can justify it by the bible. I guess to them, stoning people should still be ok too!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Even if slavery were sanctioned in the Bible (and I'd like to think that the religion still exists because it's able to ADAPT to the times somewhat), it would never have referenced the chattel slavery of a race that was instituted in the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade. The slavery of Biblical times was a MUCH different form of slavery. It involved regulations to treat slaves as humanity, not divided by racial lines, children who were rarely born into slavery but instead were born free, the opportunity for slaves to earn their freedom, and for Jewish slaves--the year of Jubillee whereby they were GUARANTEED to be set free in the seventh year should they be sold into slavery.

All that said, I had to take a history professor who defended slavery last fall. He was obnoxious. Totally conservative Christian who thought being a Marxist was the WORST offense on the face of the earth. I'm not even sure what it really meant to be accused of being a Marxist. I was embarrassed that he earned his PhD at my Ala Mater given his stupidty and good old boy mentality.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Slavery existed in biblical times and therefore is discussed in the bible. Mostly it is instructions to masters on how to treat slaves and instructions to slaves how to behave towards masters. I haven't read anywhere in the bible that actually says slavery is right.

Sugaree, can you please give me a link to Lady Lydia? I would love to read some more of her writing. It sounds very snarkworthy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.