Well, I did go to school, study law, graduated, and done several decades working in it. I have written a couple of contracts that could not be broken when challenged in court. So, my answer would be, I know a little about it.
Isn't indentured servitude a contract?
Irrelevant counselor. All this was asked and answered.
"An
indentured servant or
indentured laborer is an employee (indenturee) within a system of
unfree labor who is bound by a signed or forced contract (
indenture) to work without pay for the owner of the indenture for a period of time. The contract often lets the employer sell the labor of an indenturee to a third party. Indenturees usually enter into an indenture for a specific payment or other benefit (such as transportation to a new place), or to meet a legal obligation, such as
debt bondage. On completion of the contract, indentured servants were given their freedom, and occasionally plots of land. Indentured servitude was often brutal, with a high percentage[
vague] of servants dying prior to the expiration of their indentures.
In many countries, systems of indentured labor have now been outlawed, and are banned by the Universal Declaration of Human Rights as a form of slavery ."
Indentured servitude - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
WHAT PART OF THAT WHERE INDENTURED SERVITUDE IS BANNED AS A FORM OF SLAVERY WENT OVER YOUR HEAD?
I didn't ask for an explanation, I simply asked if it is not a contract.
Yeah, we know the point you're trying to make, cabron. You just didn't like the answer because it was honest. You want to make life look like only the blacks know suffering, slavery, and pain. Well, surprise, you don't have a monopoly on it. What makes you racist is you want whites to be held accountable because it was slavery after all... What about the black POS that sold your ancestors into slavery (presupposing you can trace your lineage back to slavery - which is probably not likely)????
You know for an attorney, you're not very bright.
My question required a simple yes or no that thus far you have danced around by bringing up a lot of other information that on it's face looks as if it's relevent to the topic when it's not and/or supports the point you're trying to make when it doesn't. It's like when someone is taking a test and they don't know the answer to one of the questions and instead of leaving it blank or answering it incorrectly they write in circles hoping that somewhere in their word salad, they might happen upon something that is close enough to the correct answer that they'll receive at least partial credit.
And you really should know better as an attorney to think that by abstracting a comment you can avoid being held liable for your remarks. I am not an asshole but I damn sure know HOW to be one so I'd appreciate it if you would refrain in the future from calling me by anything other than my moniker used here. Or simply refrain from engaging in the nasty comments with/to/about me period. Either will work for me.
So again, I will ask you since you claim to have a law degree and are familiar with contract law, if indentured servitude is not a contract. I'm not asking if it's an
enforceable contract, or one that was null and void at the point of it's execution because one or more or all of the parties to it had no intentions of ever honoring it's terms, simply is it a contract or not.
YES or
NO?
DO NOT **** WITH A SISTER!
Don't hurt him like that Newsvine. You know the boy can't get right. He can't hep himself. He's been preaching that racist bullshit to other white racists for so long that he thinks he can run it on you and that you'll simply genuflect in amazement at the superior mind of the white man.
LOL lol.
But
SERIOUSLY, you know what I'm saying is true and he does too. He's exactly the type of person I was telling you all that I have to deal with, the flim-flam, talk-all-around-the-subject, tie it up in knots, introduce a similar sounding or similar topic and then argue that instead of the actual topic to the point that nobody even remembers the point that is being argued and since I'm black and poor I must be the one in the wrong because certainly the white person can't be wrong.
And do you see how wound up he is? He's losing his shit because Blues Man disagreed with something he said (that slavery and indentured servitude are the same thing essentially) and he's about 4 or 5 pages in, arguing this point while refusing to answer the simple question with a yes or no about whether indentured servitude is a contract. He's even dragged the United Nations into the argument instead of simply replying "Yes it's a contract
HOWEVER in 19?? the United Nations
DETERMINED blah blah blah" yet he couldn't even do that because for some reason he simply can't admit that he made a mistake.
What is the meaning of contract in law?
Definition. An agreement between private parties creating mutual obligations enforceable by law.
The basic elements required for the agreement to be a legally enforceable contract are: mutual assent, expressed by a valid offer and acceptance; adequate consideration; capacity; and legality.
When did the slaves agree to be slaves? What were the obligations of the slave holders? (Hint:
NONE!)
And how can you claim that an act is "legal" if those same acts were they done to a white person, then the offender in all likelihood would be killed on the spot? And where was the mutual assent? Being told and made to do something at gunpoint is acting under duress and that in itself is grounds to invalide the "contract".
I have to sleep now so that I can rent out my brain when I wake up. See you later IM2 and thanks for everything.