Why was Antebellum Southern Slavery Immoral?

[ErikViking]

Both Boss and Kooshdakha:
No, I don't belive in universal morality stretching over time- and cultural patterns..

Then you don't understand what the term means - as I've told you many times now. You can profess any 'belief' you want, but you cannot change the meaning of the term.

Look, don't take out your inability to discuss on me. The concepts of moral and ethics are quite diverse field of philisophy, with different strains. In any of them - in any case - an action is never interesting without context.

Happy?

 

[JimBowie1958]

You're missing the boat on the illegals comparison. We in Arizona read daily of the abuses the illegals suffer at the hands of their coyotes in the crossing and after. If the coyotes feel they can get more money out of these folks, they hold them hostage for ransom. Then when released, these people are at the mercy of their friends or relatives already here. They have nothing left at this point...no money, few possessions, and in fear of being deported by anybody at odds with them. True, they aren't legally "owned" by anybody, but they are not in control of their destiny should those they trust betray them.

I'm sorry, I can't work up a whole lot of sympathy for criminals who are breaking our laws. You want to talk about a betrayal of trust? How about what Andrew Jackson did to the Native Americans? How about the countless treaties the US reneged on and outright ignored? How about the sheer GENOCIDE committed on these people? There were more than 30 million indigenous people in the US, when the first settlers came... where did they go? By 1890, there were less than 500,000.

There was no genocide.

There are more Amerindians living today than before Columbus arrived, and if you count meztizos, it is easily triple the number.

If you count those with some Amerindian blood its half the whole continent.

The genocide of Amerindians is a myth and they gave as much as they took.

 

[JimBowie1958]

The illegals and the slaves are similar in many ways, .

No, they are not.

Lol, yes, they are. Both are human, and both are exploited, though slaves had it far worse.

There have been illegal black market laborers who were taken to work in shackles and chains, so the diff isn't as great as you seem to think.

 

[Circe]

I'll agree that slavery was immoral by our modern standards.

Slavery was legal almost everywhere prior to the mid 19th century. Who stopped it BTW?

Slavery isn't immoral by modern standards!! There is a huge, huge amount of sex slavery going on all over the world, not to mention all the black slavery going on in the Mideast.

Whole countries are well-known destinations for sex tourism, such as Thailand and Bangladesh.

I guess sex slavery doesn't matter because it's "just" women.

 

[JimBowie1958]

I'll agree that slavery was immoral by our modern standards.

Slavery was legal almost everywhere prior to the mid 19th century. Who stopped it BTW?

Slavery isn't immoral by modern standards!! There is a huge, huge amount of sex slavery going on all over the world, not to mention all the black slavery going on in the Mideast.

Whole countries are well-known destinations for sex tourism, such as Thailand and Bangladesh.

I guess sex slavery doesn't matter because it's "just" women.

I guess you are referring to modern secular moral standards.

The church I belong to still regards these as slavery and immoral.

 

[JoeBlam]

Slavery isn't immoral by modern standards!! There is a huge, huge amount of sex slavery going on all over the world, not to mention all the black slavery going on in the Mideast.

Whole countries are well-known destinations for sex tourism, such as Thailand and Bangladesh.

I guess sex slavery doesn't matter because it's "just" women.

That's true and it's especially true that western women are increasingly the targets for the major kidnapping rings that supply the sex trade. In fact, there's a good chance Natalee Holloway wasn't murdered but sold to a ship captain waiting off Aruba, and disappeared.

 

[Circe]

Slavery isn't immoral by modern standards!! There is a huge, huge amount of sex slavery going on all over the world, not to mention all the black slavery going on in the Mideast.

Whole countries are well-known destinations for sex tourism, such as Thailand and Bangladesh.

I guess sex slavery doesn't matter because it's "just" women.

That's true and it's especially true that western women are increasingly the targets for the major kidnapping rings that supply the sex trade. In fact, there's a good chance Natalee Holloway wasn't murdered but sold to a ship captain waiting off Aruba, and disappeared.

White slavery; used to be a big problem in Vctorian England and is becoming a big problem again, with the oil money out there ready to capture and buy women. Blonds preferred.

I have always wondered if Natalee was sold as a slave to Arab interests.

 

[Kooshdakhaa]

I'll agree that slavery was immoral by our modern standards.

Slavery was legal almost everywhere prior to the mid 19th century. Who stopped it BTW?

Slavery isn't immoral by modern standards!! There is a huge, huge amount of sex slavery going on all over the world, not to mention all the black slavery going on in the Mideast.

Whole countries are well-known destinations for sex tourism, such as Thailand and Bangladesh.

I guess sex slavery doesn't matter because it's "just" women.

I'll say this once again...just because something is commonplace doesn't mean it's moral.

And let's not forget that a lot of sex workers are not slaves, by the way. I used to see them walking up and down the streets of my neighborhood all the time, their choice. Not slaves. Within a few months of me moving in they went to someone else's neighborhood. : )

I'm not saying they were immoral, perhaps they are...but to me they were just skanky. And fortunately their activities are illegal. So I encouraged them to get the hell out of here by calling the police on them every single day. : )

 

[Kooshdakhaa]

Hey, that gives me an idea? Why don't those white sex traffickers come and scoop up these street walkers? I mean, they're choosing the profession already, why not take them?

Oh, I forgot. They're too skanky.

 

[beagle9]

Yes they are, it's only that one had chains and the other has invisible chains, but both struggles have the same affect on the individual in the end. They both end up bitter and mad because they were seen and treated as low class citizens (taking out the trash for those whom they probably felt didn't deserve the trash being taken out for them), but there they were either being forced or invisibly coerced to do what they had to do anyway, only the slaves were even treated as worse than that.

Anytime we allow or engage in working people in ways that demean them as human beings, it is the same result and consequences in the end, but only in different degree's is all.

Invisibly coerced? That's a new one!

Illegals come here from Mexico of their own free will, no one is making them do it, and they certainly don't have to stay. In fact, there are great many Americans who think they should go! Others think, if we can't make them go, we should at least make them pay taxes, because right now, they contribute nothing to their communities or state.

You say only the slaves were treated worse, and again, I strongly disagree. Aside from the obvious fact they have a choice to leave and go back anytime they want to, yet they continue to flood across our border, they are given free emergency medical care, education for their kids, hell... citizenship for their kids! Let's talk about a few examples which are markedly worse... Like the indigenous peoples, who we call "Native Americans," but who were here long before America or European settlers. These people had their lands STOLEN, were given smallpox, then they were marched to their deaths on the Trail of Tears, where we stuck them in what amounts to a concentration camp, to live out their days. This, after killing tens of millions of their ancestors. In my opinion, their story is even worse than the slaves.

Then, we can also talk about the Chinese immigrants who built the railroad. Or the Irish immigrants, or the Italian and German immigrants, and how they were discriminated against for years in society. So we have to go WAY down the list before we get to the "deplorable treatment" of people who are breaking our law to come here illegally, of their own free will.

You are trying to connect slavery and illegal immigration, by drawing a correlation to 'greedy capitalism', which is simply a Marxist meme and has recently become popular among Socialist morons. It's a topic that warrants it's own debate, and has nothing whatsoever to do with the issues of slavery or illegal immigration.

I like the way you take and read my post, then comprehend them in your way, then change the meaning of them to your way of thinking, therefore attempting to show me saying something that I didn't actually say, but what this does is it gives you a platform to get your message out, even if it is being done on the back of something that you manipulated in order to ride upon it like a vehicle in which you have stolen in order to take a ride around town in, and this just to show off to others whom you want to impress with this tactic in which you employ. At first I must admit that I was confused when read your responses, but now I see what you are doing. Interesting!

 

[beagle9]

You're missing the boat on the illegals comparison. We in Arizona read daily of the abuses the illegals suffer at the hands of their coyotes in the crossing and after. If the coyotes feel they can get more money out of these folks, they hold them hostage for ransom. Then when released, these people are at the mercy of their friends or relatives already here. They have nothing left at this point...no money, few possessions, and in fear of being deported by anybody at odds with them. True, they aren't legally "owned" by anybody, but they are not in control of their destiny should those they trust betray them.

I'm sorry, I can't work up a whole lot of sympathy for criminals who are breaking our laws. You want to talk about a betrayal of trust? How about what Andrew Jackson did to the Native Americans? How about the countless treaties the US reneged on and outright ignored? How about the sheer GENOCIDE committed on these people? There were more than 30 million indigenous people in the US, when the first settlers came... where did they go? By 1890, there were less than 500,000.

Quit moving the goal post already.

 

[beagle9]

Invisibly coerced? That's a new one!

Illegals come here from Mexico of their own free will, no one is making them do it, and they certainly don't have to stay. In fact, there are great many Americans who think they should go! Others think, if we can't make them go, we should at least make them pay taxes, because right now, they contribute nothing to their communities or state.

You say only the slaves were treated worse, and again, I strongly disagree. Aside from the obvious fact they have a choice to leave and go back anytime they want to, yet they continue to flood across our border, they are given free emergency medical care, education for their kids, hell... citizenship for their kids! Let's talk about a few examples which are markedly worse... Like the indigenous peoples, who we call "Native Americans," but who were here long before America or European settlers. These people had their lands STOLEN, were given smallpox, then they were marched to their deaths on the Trail of Tears, where we stuck them in what amounts to a concentration camp, to live out their days. This, after killing tens of millions of their ancestors. In my opinion, their story is even worse than the slaves.

Then, we can also talk about the Chinese immigrants who built the railroad. Or the Irish immigrants, or the Italian and German immigrants, and how they were discriminated against for years in society. So we have to go WAY down the list before we get to the "deplorable treatment" of people who are breaking our law to come here illegally, of their own free will.

You are trying to connect slavery and illegal immigration, by drawing a correlation to 'greedy capitalism', which is simply a Marxist meme and has recently become popular among Socialist morons. It's a topic that warrants it's own debate, and has nothing whatsoever to do with the issues of slavery or illegal immigration.

You're missing the boat on the illegals comparison. We in Arizona read daily of the abuses the illegals suffer at the hands of their coyotes in the crossing and after. If the coyotes feel they can get more money out of these folks, they hold them hostage for ransom. Then when released, these people are at the mercy of their friends or relatives already here. They have nothing left at this point...no money, few possessions, and in fear of being deported by anybody at odds with them. True, they aren't legally "owned" by anybody, but they are not in control of their destiny should those they trust betray them.

Exactly, and the beat goes on, yeah the beat goes on..

 

[Unkotare]

Both Boss and Kooshdakha:
No, I don't belive in universal morality stretching over time- and cultural patterns..

Then you don't understand what the term means - as I've told you many times now. You can profess any 'belief' you want, but you cannot change the meaning of the term.

Look, don't take out your inability to discuss on me. The concepts of moral and ethics are quite diverse field of philisophy, with different strains. In any of them - in any case - an action is never interesting without context.

Happy?

I'm not happy about your ignorance at all.

 

[ErikViking]

Then you don't understand what the term means - as I've told you many times now. You can profess any 'belief' you want, but you cannot change the meaning of the term.

Look, don't take out your inability to discuss on me. The concepts of moral and ethics are quite diverse field of philisophy, with different strains. In any of them - in any case - an action is never interesting without context.

Happy?

I'm not happy about your ignorance at all.

Then you don't understand the meaning of "happy".

 

[Unkotare]

Look, don't take out your inability to discuss on me. The concepts of moral and ethics are quite diverse field of philisophy, with different strains. In any of them - in any case - an action is never interesting without context.

Happy?

I'm not happy about your ignorance at all.

Then you don't understand the meaning of "happy".

Go back to your bong.

 

[ErikViking]

I'm not happy about your ignorance at all.

Then you don't understand the meaning of "happy".

Go back to your bong.

That "whole" post show that you don't know what it means.

 

[Unkotare]

Then you don't understand the meaning of "happy".

Go back to your bong.

That "whole" post show that you don't know what it means.

Now put down the bong and try again in English, moron.

 

[numan]

But slavery wasn't really about economics. There was no other way for cotton to get harvested, other than to be picked by human hands.
.

The cognitive dissonance exemplified by putting those two sentences into juxtaposition is quite breath-taking !!

Of course it was about economics.

Has anything of any significance in the Terrorist Founded United States ever been about anything other than economics? !!!!

.

 

[ErikViking]

Go back to your bong.

That "whole" post show that you don't know what it means.

Now put down the bong and try again in English, moron.

Does this serve any purpose to you?

 

[Stashman]

This is one of those topics that is best to be avoided but I'll chime in a little anyway.

First off I am as opposed to slavery in any form that you can get. It is reprehensible in every way that I can see. The issue is whether or not is was immoral. From everything I have read or researched on this topic over the years I can say that without a doubt it was and is immoral. Having said that than you have to realize that not everyone who partook of it is guilty.

Let's say you were born in the American south to a slave owning family. That person being brought up in it does not think of the moral or immoral issues of it. To them it was just the way it was. That's why there were so many opposed to freeing the slaves. They had to than look at the issue from new eyes, and being that most were uneducated in those days, it was simpler to them to just keep things as they were. This is NOT making excuses for anyone. As I've stated I am against it in all of its forms.

Even though most were illiterate back than, they were though very familiar with what the bible had to say. This was the only way they had to measure morality. Even though the bible talks about the Jewish people in slavery, as far as I know there is nothing specific in it that says that slavery overall is wrong in the eyes of God. So, you have the educated ones teaching the uneducated that the bible is not opposed to owning slaves and that in of itself was very telling of the mindset of the American southerner.