Teacher asks 8th-grade students to list positives of slavery...

[Admiral Rockwell Tory]

Besides, starting Monday I will be working for the Army!

Nice to see you move up in the world, 'Admiral'.

lol

No, trying to bring them up to standards!

My supervisor is a retired SFC.

 

[Slimdugger99]

You forgot the free food and stellar accommodations.

That cabin is very old and at one time would have been a home most Americans would have been proud to have, dude.

You should live in such a place, it matches your minuscule intellect. Oh, yes, your Irish slaves were debunked as white supremacist propaganda in the March 17, 2017 issue of the N.Y. Times. Now we know where your world view originated.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Slimdugger99]

Teacher asks 8th-grade students to list positives of slavery

Let's see...

1. Free labor.

2. The cotton industry was booming.

3. As the great Cliven Bundy once said, it "gave them something to do".

4. 12 Years A Slave, which was a great movie, never would have been made.

Can you think of any more?

The school is just one more PC Idiocracy. EVERYTHING has a + and a - side to it, even slavery, that is the nature of the universe, otherwise there never would have been slaves! It was a lesson in critical thinking, thinking outside the box, not justification of slavery, but now thanks to fear of PC, these kids will lose a valuable lesson in looking at something very bad and seeing that even such things have their positive aspects. The Chinese call it yin and yang, but in the Dumbed Down States of America, our poor kids are not allowed to think and learn freely, being told by their "school" that you are only allowed to believe that things like slavery, war, old age, illness and even death are all bad with nothing good or positive to ever be gleaned, taken or learned from them.

Only a white person in delusional denial thinks that there was anything positive about slavery. Especially in a nation whose credo reads “All men are created equal”, such conclusions would invite the enslavement of those privileged and in power presently. Maybe your opinion would be different if your ancestors and their progeny had been slaves.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Oh. You mean like Hebrews? Native Americans? Irish folks? Asians?

Hebrews were slaves thousands of years ago in Egypt, Native Americans were never slaves,

The question, of itself, is not offensive. On the contrary, education should constructively challenge the developing intellect of students.
The positives of slavery did not go to the slaves, for example, but to the owners and their economic system. A student could and should have been able to see that, at least. Ultimately, the question could have led to the answer, "There were no positives for the victims of this practice".
They should also have learned about the context, that until relatively soon before the war to preserve the Union, slavery was common in the world and almost all cultures. Whites were not evil for having black slaves, just unenlightened.
Nuance seems less and less present in American social debate. Everything has to be 'good' or 'bad', and all according to the current mode and definition.

People who constantly pound on about how bad and evil white folks in America were for keeping slaves generally ignore the fact that slavery's been around throughout mankind in all parts of the world. That's just the way man rolled for centuries; it was a natural part of life and not looked at as morally wrong or anything. Not saying it was right or endorsing it. That's just the way it was and it was handed down through generations across cultures, continents, etc.

Pretty much every other advanced nation had abolished slavery decades before our Civil War.

And they abolished slavery peacefully.

It's a pretty wretched indictment on the South they were one of the few places in the world that would fight to the bloody death one of the worst wars in history to preserve human bondage.

, ever slaves in America. Or anywhere else for that matter. Maybe you’re the one who needs to go to school to learn the truth of slavery. Ignorance is a deal killer in these forums.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You do realize that the North attacked the South, right?

Who writes your history for you? The civil war began when South Carolina seceded from the Union and fired upon Fort Sumpter. This discussion is becoming a farce of right wing racist fake history. First fake news, now fake history.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[paperview]

You do realize that the North attacked the South, right?

The south started the Civil War, bozo.

 

[JimBowie1958]

You should stop making up history just to suit your arguments. Where in the new world were the Irish enslaved?

Most of them were sold to plantations in the Caribbean, dude. and here is something you might use to reduce some of your abysmal ignorance.

The slaves that time forgot

Most people have heard of the Great Famine, which reduced the population of Ireland by around 25%.
That pales in comparison to the disaster that England inflicted upon Ireland between 1641 and 1652, when the population of Ireland fell from 1,466,000 to 616,000.

Then things got worse.

What to do with the Irish?

From the Tudor reconquest of Ireland until Irish Independence in 1921, the English puzzled over the problem of what to do with all those Irish people.
They were the wrong religion. They spoke the wrong language. But the big problem was that there were just too many of them.

The English had been practicing a slow genocide against the Irish since Queen Elizabeth, but the Irish bred too fast and were tough to kill. On the other side of the Atlantic, there was a chronic labor shortage (because the local natives tended to die out too quickly in slavery conditions).
Putting two and two together, King James I started sending Irish slaves to the new world.
The first recorded sale of Irish slaves was to a settlement in the Amazon in 1612, seven years before the first African slaves arrived in Jamestown.

The Proclamation of 1625 by James II made it official policy that all Irish political prisoners be transported to the West Indies and sold to English planters. Soon Irish slaves were the majority of slaves in the English colonies.

In 1629 a large group of Irish men and women were sent to Guiana, and by 1632, Irish were the main slaves sold to Antigua and Montserrat in the West Indies. By 1637 a census showed that 69% of the total population of Montserrat were Irish slaves, which records show was a cause of concern to the English planters. But there were not enough political prisoners to supply the demand, so every petty infraction carried a sentence of transporting, and slaver gangs combed the country sides to kidnap enough people to fill out their quotas. The slavers were so full of zest that they sometimes grabbed non-Irishmen. On March 25, 1659, a petition was received in London claiming that 72 Englishmen were wrongly sold as slaves in Barbados, along with 200 Frenchmen and 7-8,000 Scots.
So many Irish slaves were sent to Barbados, between 12,000 and 60,000, that the term "barbadosed" began to be used.
By the 1630's, Ireland was the primary source of the English slave trade.
And then disaster struck.

Cromwell

After Oliver Cromwell defeated the royalists in the English Civil War, he turned to Ireland, who had allied themselves with the defeated royalists. What happened next could be considered genocide.
The famine (caused by the English intentionally destroying foodstocks) and plague that followed Cromwell's massacres reduced the population of Ireland to around 40%.

And then Cromwell got really nasty.
Anyone implicated in the rebellion had their land confiscated and was sold into slavery in the West Indies. Even catholic landowners who hadn't taken part of the rebellion had their land confiscated.
Catholicism was outlawed and catholic priests were executed when found.
To top it off, he ordered the ethnic cleansing of Ireland east of Shannon in 1652. Soldiers were encouraged to kill any Irish who refused to relocate....

As for the Irish slaves, Cromwell specifically targeted Irish children.

“During the 1650s, over 100,000 Irish children between the ages of 10 and 14 were taken from their parents and sold as slaves in the West Indies, Virginia and New England. In this decade, 52,000 Irish (mostly women and children) were sold to Barbados and Virginia. Another 30,000 Irish men and women were also transported and sold to the highest bidder. In 1656, [Oliver] Cromwell ordered that 2000 Irish children be taken to Jamaica and sold as slaves to English settlers.” For some reason, history likes to call these Irish slaves as 'indentured servants'. As if they were somehow considered better than African slaves. This can be considered an attempt at whitewashing the history of the Irish slave trade.
There does exist indentured servitude where two parties sign a contract for a limited amount of time. This is not what happened to the Irish from 1625 onward. They were sold as slaves, pure and simple.​

OF course you wont read the article even though it is from the Daily Kos, lol. You ideological idiots have an allergy to contrary facts as you well demonstrate.

Indentured servitude wasn’t slavery if that’s what you reference.

Yes, if it is involuntary it is slavery.

Slavs were sold into slavery by the Germans? In whose world history did you find that gem? I know, Steve Brannon’s world history, right?

History of slavery - Wikipedia

The Vikings raided across Europe, but took the most slaves in raids on the British Isles and in Eastern Europe. While the Vikings kept some slaves as servants, known as thralls, they sold most captives in the Byzantine or Islamic markets. In the West their target populations were primarily English, Irish, and Scottish, while in the East they were mainly Slavs. The Viking slave-trade slowly ended in the 11th century, as the Vikings settled in the European territories they had once raided. They converted serfs to Christianity and themselves merged with the local populace.[264]

In the central Europe, specifically the Frankish/German/Holy Roman Empire of Charlemagne, raids and wars to the east generated a steady supply of slaves from the Slavic captives of these regions. Because of a high demand for slaves in the wealthy Muslim empires of Northern Africa, Spain, and the near East, especially for slaves of European descent, a market for these slaves rapidly emerged. So lucrative was this market that it spawned an economic boom in central and western Europe, today known as the Carolingian Renaissance.[265][266][267] This boom period for slaves stretched from the early Muslim conquests to the High Middle Ages but declined in the later Middle Ages as the Islamic Golden Age waned.​

Ooops, you been caught screwing up with NoFacts again, Ignofuckingramus.

Romans and Arabs enslaved some in lands that they conquered. The city state that was Rome didn’t have the need or infrastructure to enslave more than a few of the most educated to act as teachers and servants.

Lol, the Romans had so many slaves that they lived in fear of rebellions like Sparticus led, dumbass.
Slavery in ancient Rome - Wikipedia

Estimates for the prevalence of slavery in the Roman Empire vary. Estimates of the percentage of the population of Italy who were slaves range from 30 to 40 percent in the 1st century BC, upwards of two to three million slaves in Italy by the end of the 1st century BCE, about 35% to 40% of Italy's population.[37][38][39] For the Empire as a whole, the slave population has been estimated at just under five million, representing 10–15% of the total population of 50–60 million+ inhabitants. An estimated 49% of all slaves were owned by the elite, who made up less than 1.5% of the Empire's population. About half of all slaves worked in the countryside where they were a small percentage of the population except on some large agricultural, especially imperial, estates; the remainder the other half were a significant percentage 25% or more in towns and cities as domestics and workers in commercial enterprises and manufacturers.[40]

Roman slavery was not based on ideas of race.[41][42] Slaves were drawn from all over Europe and the Mediterranean, including Gaul, Hispania, North Africa, Syria, Germany, Britannia, the Balkans, Greece etc. Generally slaves in Italy were indigenous Italians,[43] with a minority of foreigners (including both slaves and freedmen) born outside of Italy estimated at 5% of the total in the capital, where their number was largest, at its peak. Those from outside of Europe were predominantly of Greek descent, while the Jewish ones never fully assimilated into Roman society, remaining an identifiable minority. The slaves (especially the foreigners) had higher mortality rates and lower birth rates than natives, and were sometimes even subjected to mass expulsions.[44] The average recorded age at death for the slaves of the city of Rome was extraordinarily low: seventeen and a half years (17.2 for males; 17.9 for females).[45]​

Slavery on an industrial scale was a predominantly American enterprise and American companies and banks facilitated and profited from its proliferation in the Caribbean and South America.

Yeah its not as if the Romans and Arabs had an entire industry based on slavery.....woops!
Slavery in ancient Rome - Wikipedia

During the period of Roman imperial expansion, the increase in wealth amongst the Roman elite and the substantial growth of slavery transformed the economy.[30] Although the economy was dependent on slavery, Rome was not the most slave-dependent culture in history. Among the Spartans, for instance, the slave class of helots outnumbered the free by about seven to one, according to Herodotus.[31] In any case, the overall role of slavery in Roman economy is a discussed issue among scholars.[32][33][34]

Delos in the eastern Mediterranean was made a free port in 166 BCE and became one of the main market venues for slaves. Multitudes of slaves who found their way to Italy were purchased by wealthy landowners in need of large numbers of slaves to labor on their estates. Historian Keith Hopkins noted that it was land investment and agricultural production which generated great wealth in Italy, and considered that Rome's military conquests and the subsequent introduction of vast wealth and slaves into Italy had effects comparable to widespread and rapid technological innovations.[16]

Augustus imposed a 2 percent tax on the sale of slaves, estimated to generate annual revenues of about 5 million sesterces—a figure that indicates some 250,000 sales.[35] The tax was increased to 4 percent by 43 AD.[36] Slave markets seem to have existed in every city of the Empire, but outside Rome the major center was Ephesus.​

History of slavery - Wikipedia

Barbary pirates and Maltese corsairs both raided for slaves and purchased slaves from European merchants, often the Jewish Radhanites, one of the few groups who could easily move between the Christian and Islamic worlds.[276] Records of Jewish participation in the slave trade go back to the 5th century.[277] Olivia Remie Constable wrote: "Muslim and Jewish merchants brought slaves into al-Andalus from eastern Europe and Christian Spain, and then re-exported them to other regions of the Islamic world."[276] The etymology of the English word slave recalls this period, as the word sklabos means Slav.​

Barbary slave trade - Wikipedia

The Barbary slave trade refers to the slave markets that flourished on the Barbary Coast of North Africa, which included the Ottomanprovinces of Algeria, Tunisia and Tripolitania and the independent sultanate of Morocco, between the 16th and middle of the 18th century. The Ottoman provinces in North Africa were nominally under Ottoman suzerainty, but in reality they were mostly autonomous. The North African slave markets were part of the Arab slave trade.


The Barbary Coast
European slaves were acquired by Barbary pirates in slave raids on ships and by raids on coastal towns from Italy to the Netherlands, as far north as Iceland and east into the Mediterranean.

The Ottoman eastern Mediterranean was the scene of intense piracy.[1]As late as the 18th century, piracy continued to be a "consistent threat to maritime traffic in the Aegean".[2]

For centuries, large vessels on the Mediterranean relied on galley slaves supplied by North African and Ottoman slave traders.
​

Damn! You been screwing the pooch again, doofus! roflmao

Hundreds of thousands of Irish slaves; a truly monumental lie. How about Martians?

roflmao, your inability to ascertain and grasp simply historical fact makes you a borderline imbecile ; no need to bring up Martians, dude.

 

[JimBowie1958]

You do realize that the North attacked the South, right?

The south started the Civil War, bozo.

Well, the victors have been writing the history books for decades now about the Civil War, but on this point, Northern military bases in the South near Southern towns did fire on civilians who approached them to demand their surrender to Confederate military.

Those were the first shots fired, dude, by UNION troops.

 

[paperview]

Southern Rebels fired the first shots -- and did so months before Sumter.

The South had been banging the drums of war for years before.

Lost Cause enthusiasts are such lost causes.

 

[regent]

Sounds like a good lesson.

 

[there4eyeM]

There was no "South" other than that in the minds of those who sought to renege on their association with the Perpetual Union. Instead of lawful means of resolving the crisis, a rebellion broke out that was eventually put down by Federal forces, as had happened before. American troops remained in America and defended the Republic. They invaded no one.

 

[JimBowie1958]

You should live in such a place, it matches your minuscule intellect. Oh, yes, your Irish slaves were debunked as white supremacist propaganda in the March 17, 2017 issue of the N.Y. Times. Now we know where your world view originated.

Ah, you mad bro?

The New York Commie Times cannot change the history of Irish slavery, lol, doofus.

 

[Slimdugger99]

Teacher asks 8th-grade students to list positives of slavery

Let's see...

1. Free labor.

2. The cotton industry was booming.

3. As the great Cliven Bundy once said, it "gave them something to do".

4. 12 Years A Slave, which was a great movie, never would have been made.

Can you think of any more?

The school is just one more PC Idiocracy. EVERYTHING has a + and a - side to it, even slavery, that is the nature of the universe, otherwise there never would have been slaves! It was a lesson in critical thinking, thinking outside the box, not justification of slavery, but now thanks to fear of PC, these kids will lose a valuable lesson in looking at something very bad and seeing that even such things have their positive aspects. The Chinese call it yin and yang, but in the Dumbed Down States of America, our poor kids are not allowed to think and learn freely, being told by their "school" that you are only allowed to believe that things like slavery, war, old age, illness and even death are all bad with nothing good or positive to ever be gleaned, taken or learned from them.

Only a white person in delusional denial thinks that there was anything positive about slavery. Especially in a nation whose credo reads “All men are created equal”, such conclusions would invite the enslavement of those privileged and in power presently. Maybe your opinion would be different if your ancestors and their progeny had been slaves.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Oh. You mean like Hebrews? Native Americans? Irish folks? Asians?

Hebrews were slaves thousands of years ago in Egypt, Native Americans were never slaves, nor were the Irish or Asians, ever slaves in America. Or anywhere else for that matter.

Hebrews WERE slaves, and in a way, have been held prisoner ever since. Even today, they are are walled up and under constant attack just for living. If that isn't a form of slavery, I don't know what is. Just as the Irish were considered dirt by the English for a long time. As to the native Indians, no, they were never taken from their land and forced to work as slaves, they were just killed, butchered, rounded up and taken from their land, herded into ranches on plots of the most undesirable land imaginable, then left to be forgotten. Maybe worse than slavery. The Colonialists broke every pact, every agreement with them, lied to them, cheated them, and left them with not one piece of land anyone would want to live in poverty.

Jews were held in slavery by the Egyptians in Egypt where the Jews had settled to live. Sort of like the Japanese were interred here in America during the Second World War. They weren’t imported, sold, and bartered as property for profit nor was their culture systematically destroyed, their psyche and humanity stripped from them, their children separated and sold away and any and every indignity imaginable visited upon them. Their Mothers and Sisters raped and Fathers emasculated, whipped, and hung. No other humans in history have survived 400 years of such a hell on earth, cut off from their own history, amongst the enslavers bent on their destruction.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Slimdugger99]

You should live in such a place, it matches your minuscule intellect. Oh, yes, your Irish slaves were debunked as white supremacist propaganda in the March 17, 2017 issue of the N.Y. Times. Now we know where your world view originated.

Ah, you mad bro?

The New York Commie Times cannot change the history of Irish slavery, lol, doofus.

You’re just a rabid racist, and you’re stupid too boot. I hope all you Trump loving losers are equally intelligent. However I’m betting you’re even stupider.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[bgrouse]

The school is just one more PC Idiocracy. EVERYTHING has a + and a - side to it, even slavery, that is the nature of the universe, otherwise there never would have been slaves! It was a lesson in critical thinking, thinking outside the box, not justification of slavery, but now thanks to fear of PC, these kids will lose a valuable lesson in looking at something very bad and seeing that even such things have their positive aspects. The Chinese call it yin and yang, but in the Dumbed Down States of America, our poor kids are not allowed to think and learn freely, being told by their "school" that you are only allowed to believe that things like slavery, war, old age, illness and even death are all bad with nothing good or positive to ever be gleaned, taken or learned from them.

Only a white person in delusional denial thinks that there was anything positive about slavery. Especially in a nation whose credo reads “All men are created equal”, such conclusions would invite the enslavement of those privileged and in power presently. Maybe your opinion would be different if your ancestors and their progeny had been slaves.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Oh. You mean like Hebrews? Native Americans? Irish folks? Asians?

Hebrews were slaves thousands of years ago in Egypt, Native Americans were never slaves, nor were the Irish or Asians, ever slaves in America. Or anywhere else for that matter.

Hebrews WERE slaves, and in a way, have been held prisoner ever since. Even today, they are are walled up and under constant attack just for living. If that isn't a form of slavery, I don't know what is. Just as the Irish were considered dirt by the English for a long time. As to the native Indians, no, they were never taken from their land and forced to work as slaves, they were just killed, butchered, rounded up and taken from their land, herded into ranches on plots of the most undesirable land imaginable, then left to be forgotten. Maybe worse than slavery. The Colonialists broke every pact, every agreement with them, lied to them, cheated them, and left them with not one piece of land anyone would want to live in poverty.

Jews were held in slavery by the Egyptians in Egypt where the Jews had settled to live. Sort of like the Japanese were interred here in America during the Second World War. They weren’t imported, sold, and bartered as property for profit nor was their culture systematically destroyed, their psyche and humanity stripped from them, their children separated and sold away and any and every indignity imaginable visited upon them. Their Mothers and Sisters raped and Fathers emasculated, whipped, and hung. No other humans in history have survived 400 years of such a hell on earth, cut off from their own history, amongst the enslavers bent on their destruction.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Cut off from their history? They're free to go back whenever they want.

I won't hold my breath.

 

[JimBowie1958]

Southern Rebels fired the first shots -- and did so months before Sumter.

The South had been banging the drums of war for years before.

Lost Cause enthusiasts are such lost causes.

No, just the facts, dude.

Fort Pickens - Wikipedia

By the time of the American Civil War, Fort Pickens had not been occupied since shortly after the Mexican–American War. Despite its dilapidated condition, Lieutenant Adam J. Slemmer, in charge of United States forces at Fort Barrancas, decided Fort Pickens was the most defensible post in the area. He decided to abandon Fort Barrancas when, around midnight of January 8, 1861, his guards repelled a group of local civilians who intended to occupy the fort. Some historians claim that these were the first shots fired in the Civil War.

On January 10, 1861, the day Florida declared its secession from the Union, Slemmer destroyed over 20,000 pounds of gunpowder at Fort McRee. He then spiked the guns at Fort Barrancas, and moved his 51 soldiers and 30 sailors to Fort Pickens. On January 15, 1861 and January 18, 1861, Slemmer refused surrender demands from ColonelWilliam Henry Chase of the Florida militia. Ironically, Chase had designed and constructed the fort as captain in the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Slemmer defended the fort against threat of attack until he was reinforced and relieved in April 1861 by Colonel Harvey Brown. Despite repeated Confederate threats, Fort Pickens was one of only three Southern forts to remain in Union hands throughout the war,
​

Just think about it using your own brain, dude. Why would the civilians of the Southern Confederacy let the Union keep forts that could blockade Southern ports at any time?

You think we would p[ut up with that crap today?

No, we would negotiate some kind of deal to get the forts under our control..

That is what the Southern civilians tried to do but were 'repulsed' (i.e. fired upon) in doing so.

But by all means, find me a case of Southern Confederate troops firing on Union civilians or military prior to January 8, 1861 and then you would have proven your case.

But you cant because it did not happen. You have been lied to about the Civil War your entire life, man. That is what victors do.

 

[JimBowie1958]

You’re just a rabid racist, and you’re stupid too boot. I hope all you Trump loving losers are equally intelligent. However I’m betting you’re even stupider.

Ah, you must hate facts that make you look like the stupid ass hat that you truly are, dont you?

 

[JimBowie1958]

Jews were held in slavery by the Egyptians in Egypt where the Jews had settled to live. Sort of like the Japanese were interred here in America during the Second World War. They weren’t imported, sold, and bartered as property for profit nor was their culture systematically destroyed, their psyche and humanity stripped from them, their children separated and sold away and any and every indignity imaginable visited upon them. Their Mothers and Sisters raped and Fathers emasculated, whipped, and hung. No other humans in history have survived 400 years of such a hell on earth, cut off from their own history, amongst the enslavers bent on their destruction.

African slaves were enslaved by Arabs and local Bantu subtribes, not white people, and if whites did not trade blankets, iron tools and beads for them, the Arabs would have just traded them elsewhere in their vast system of slavery across the African continent and the Bantu would have simply slaughtered them, maybe even eaten them, lol.

 

[AvgGuyIA]

The topic isn’t controversial, slavery in the United States was a fact, and racism is. The whole discussion was an indoctrination by the teacher of her students into a convoluted strategy of denial. A strategy of splitting hairs to avoid the responsibilities of racism and genocide. This same strategy of denial and avoidance is afoot here, on this board in this discussion as it was in the aforementioned classroom.

Me thinks this one ^^^ doth protest too much. Perhaps Slim is projecting his true racist feelings. After all, nothing pissed off Democrats more than republicans taking away their slaves.

 

[AvgGuyIA]

The question, of itself, is not offensive. On the contrary, education should constructively challenge the developing intellect of students.
The positives of slavery did not go to the slaves, for example, but to the owners and their economic system. A student could and should have been able to see that, at least. Ultimately, the question could have led to the answer, "There were no positives for the victims of this practice".
They should also have learned about the context, that until relatively soon before the war to preserve the Union, slavery was common in the world and almost all cultures. Whites were not evil for having black slaves, just unenlightened.
Nuance seems less and less present in American social debate. Everything has to be 'good' or 'bad', and all according to the current mode and definition.

It’s not offensive to you, you should have said. But in your universe, you and your kind are all that matters, and all crimes against those outside your clan merely “uninformed”. By your logic any affront can be rationalized into its good and bad parts and that all offenses have their good points. Furthermore you assert that whites were ignorant of slavery’s evil despite its prohibition in the Bible and credo expressed in the constitution that all men were created equal. To advance such lies under the pretext of some academic rigor is consistent with those racist deniers who are still, to this day, intent on redeeming this sad period in our history by denying its past and present effects. This teachers lesson plan and the public debate that has ensued lays bare the racist infection that has spread into every nook and cranny of all our institutions.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

In fact, no question is offensive; being offended is a choice. Questions are mere words (especially written questions in the context being discussed). The concept of someone 'making' another person react by using words reduces the 'reactor' to an automaton. Would you give me the power to control your emotions and reactions?
As for Biblical prohibition, please cite the passage.
Before calling someone a liar, it would be best to carefully evaluate what he/she truly said and not what was taken as a meaning. There is no basis for saying the quoted post rationalized any and all affronts. What is more, you equate "unenlightened" with "ignorant", then use that to accuse one of lying.
The quoted post absolutely does not defend slavery, but rather attacks it. The manner in which you take it is dominated by an inflexibility of reasoning. That is the unfortunate state of debate here so often.

What are you talking about? Slavery was attacked in the post you say, no it wasn’t attacked it was justified. There was an equivocation between good slavery and bad slavery. Slaveholders were pardoned as being “merely uninformed”, does that rate as an attack on slavery in your world? Your rebuttal is an affront to any sincere discussion of the problem. “Inflexibility of reasoning”, what facts about the American genocide called slavery are flexible? You act as if some academic discussion of the subject can change its reality. That reality reaches powerfully still into our present and shapes the minds that have to create our common future. Pretending that there was something good in that crime risks our souls as well as our country.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

. Stop judging the past with today's standards. We as a society have moved on and you'd be hard pressed to find any Southeners who want slavery brought back. Slim the standards and morals you have today may very well be found abhorant to those living 25 years from now who look back at these times.

 

[AvgGuyIA]

"Teacher asks 8th-grade students to list positives of slavery..."

Young conservatives in training.

Idiot who passed his finals. ^^^

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

If all the teacher did was ask to list the positive and negative aspects of slavery, where is the wrong? The negative side could be endless, while one could easily judge the other side devoid of points. This could easily be viewed as testing the evaluative abilities of students to read and reason without automatic, useless emotion.
Of course slavery was always wrong on human terms, but it was also practiced in all ages by virtually all cultures. No one was prosecuted after slavery was abolished for having had slaves previously.
I don't understand how people ever thought they could 'own' another person. I don't understand why people deal with women as inferior to men. I don't know why we tolerate this in the world today. Why continue to chew the old bone of slavery when a far greater number of people are oppressed before our very eyes right now. It is at least hypocritical to be scandalized by an institution that is now illegal and gone while allowing greater wrong to continue today. Where is the force to free our sisters?

Because there’s nothing ‘positive’ about slavery – the idea that there might be something ‘beneficial’ about slavery is as reprehensible as it is wrong.

That this is even being considered is remarkable idiocy.