Lincoln….was…..a…..racist. It’s amazing that this even needs to be said. He didn’t believe that black men were white mens equals…and his first impulse was to ship them off to Africa.

(June 20, 2023 at 3:36 am)Nishant Xavier Wrote: (1) I showed you [b]the Christians who Abolished Slavery

Bunch of lies. Christians should have denounced slavery right away, with Jesus and Paul, but no, those two even embraced slavery.

Popes and other fathers of the Catholic Church owned slaves as late as 1800. Jesuits in colonial Maryland and nuns in Europe and Latin America owned slaves. The Church did not condemn slavery until 1888, after every western nation had abolished the practice. Church even had slaves in the 20th century, in those washeries where they kept unpaid labor as girls to wash clothes for money that the Church collected.

And it's even happening in the 21st century

Quote:Nuns have suffered and are still suffering sexual abuse at the hands of Catholic priests and bishops, and have even been held as sexual slaves, Pope Francis confirmed on Tuesday. The abuse was so severe in one case that an entire congregation of nuns was dissolved by former Pope Benedict.

The scope of the abuse of nuns by clergy members first came to light with the publication at the beginning of February of the monthly Vatican magazine "Women Church World." The edition included Francis' own take on the scandal -- long known about by the Vatican but virtually never discussed -- in which he blamed the unchecked power wielded by priests and higher clergy across the Catholic Church for such crimes.

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/pope-franci...er-france/

(June 20, 2023 at 3:57 am)Nishant Xavier Wrote: Marx and Engels, Vicious Racists.

Who gives a fuck if they were? We are not fucking communists.

(June 20, 2023 at 3:57 am)Nishant Xavier Wrote: Marx and Engels, Vicious Racists. From News Herald: Gee, just Imagine if Lincoln and Wilberforce had thought like this. Thank God they didn;t.

"Most people who call themselves Marxists know very little of Karl Marx's life and have never read his three-volume "Das Kapital." Volume I was published in 1867, the only volume published before Marx's death in 1883. Volumes II and III were later edited and published in his name by his friend and collaborator Friedrich Engels. Most people who call themselves Marxist have only read his 1848 pamphlet "The Communist Manifesto," which was written with Engels.

Marx is a hero to many labor union leaders and civil rights organizations, including leftist groups like Black Lives Matter, antifa and some Democratic Party leaders. It is easy to be a Marxist if you know little of his life. Marx's predictions about capitalism and the "withering away of the state" turned out to be grossly wrong. What most people do not know is that Marx was a racist and an anti-Semite.

When the U.S. annexed California after the Mexican-American War, Marx wrote: "Without violence nothing is ever accomplished in history." Then he asked, "Is it a misfortune that magnificent California was seized from the lazy Mexicans who did not know what to do with it?" Friedrich Engels added: "In America we have witnessed the conquest of Mexico and have rejoiced at it. It is to the interest of its own development that Mexico will be placed under the tutelage of the United States." Many of Marx's racist ideas were reported in "Karl Marx, Racist" a book written by Nathaniel Weyl, a former member of the U.S. Communist Party.

In 1887, Paul Lafargue, who was Marx's son-in-law, was a candidate for a council seat in a Paris district that contained a zoo. Engels claimed that Paul had "one eighth or one twelfth [N-word] blood." In an April 1887 letter to Paul's wife, Engels wrote, "Being in his quality as a [N-word], a degree nearer to the rest of the animal kingdom than the rest of us, he is undoubtedly the most appropriate representative of that district."

Marx's anti-Semitic views were no secret. In 1844, he published an essay titled "On the Jewish Question." He wrote that the worldly religion of Jews was "huckstering" and that the Jew's god was "money." Marx's view of Jews was that they could only become an emancipated ethnicity or culture when they no longer exist. Just one step short of calling for genocide, Marx said, "The classes and the races, too weak to master the new conditions of life, must give way."

Marx's philosophical successors shared ugly thoughts on blacks and other minorities. Che Guevara, a hero of the left, was a horrific racist. He wrote in his 1952 memoir, "The Motorcycle Diaries": "The [N-word] is indolent and lazy and spends his money on frivolities, whereas the European is forward-looking, organized and intelligent."

And it's just painful to read beyond that point. I trust the historical fact is clear that these men were Vicious Racists. But if necessary, more Evidence can always be given, for those open to the Truth.

One of the startling similarities between atheism and Christianity is that there is nothing in either position to guarantee that its adherents won't be racist. One of the chief differences is that in atheism, there is nothing that specifically promotes racism.

While it is unlikely that Wilberforce was a racist, it's beyond debate that he hated religious freedom, women's rights, the working poor, and free speech.

Boru

@ Fake Messiah: 1888? Absolutely false, and you don't know what you're talking about. And you don't the know the (admittedly complex) 2000 year history. This is from 1839.

"But as the law of the Gospel universally and earnestly enjoined a sincere charity towards all, and considering that Our Lord Jesus Christ had declared that He considered as done or refused to Himself everything kind and merciful done or refused to the small and needy, it naturally follows, not only that Christians should regard as their brothers their slaves and, above all, their Christian slaves, but that they should be more inclined to set free those who merited it; which it was the custom to do chiefly upon the occasion of the Easter Feast as Gregory of Nyssa tells us. There were not lacking Christians, who, moved by an ardent charity ‘cast themselves into bondage in order to redeem others,’ many instances of which our predecessor, Clement I, of very holy memory, declares to have come to his knowledge. In the process of time, the fog of pagan superstition being more completely dissipated and the manners of barbarous people having been softened, thanks to Faith operating by Charity, it at last comes about that, since several centuries, there are no more slaves in the greater number of Christian nations ...

We warn and adjure earnestly in the Lord faithful Christians of every condition that no one in the future dare to vex anyone, despoil him of his possessions, reduce to servitude, or lend aid and favour to those who give themselves up to these practices, or exercise that inhuman traffic by which the Blacks, as if they were not men but rather animals, having been brought into servitude, in no matter what way, are, without any distinction, in contempt of the rights of justice and humanity, bought, sold, and devoted sometimes to the hardest labour..."

Read Sicut Dudum from the 15th Century and Sublimus Dei in the 16th. They condemned the enslavement of Blacks from the beginning. Now, after Africans and others had already been forcibly and unjustly taken from their lands, the practice was tolerated for a while. However, the Popes repeatedly spoke against it, as the above shows.

You still haven't show me any Atheists leading the charge to Abolish Slavery. Quite telling.

Read the New Advent Article, Christianity and Slavery, it gives a fair and good overview of the 2000 year history. Originally written in 1907, so some language is archaic etc.

"The Trinitarians, founded in 1198 by St. John of Matha and St. Felix of Valois, established hospitals for slaves at Algiers and Tunis in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries; and from its foundation until the year 1787 it redeemed 900,000 slaves. The Order of Our Lady of Ransom (Mercedarians), founded in the thirteenth century by St. Peter Nolasco, and established more especially in France and Spain, redeemed 490,736 slaves between the years 1218 and 1632. To the three regular vows its founder had added a fourth, "To become a hostage in the hands of the infidels, if that is necessary for the deliverance of Christ's faithful." Many Mercedarians kept this vow even to martyrdom. Another order undertook not only to redeem captives, but also to give them spiritual and material assistance. St. Vincent of Paul had been a slave at Algiers in 1605, and had witnessed the sufferings and perils of Christian slaves. At the request of Louis XIV, he sent them, in 1642, priests of the congregation which he had founded. Many of these priests, indeed, were invested with consular functions at Tunis and at Algiers. From 1642 to 1660 they redeemed about 1200 slaves at an expense of about 1,200,000 livres. But their greatest achievements were in teaching the Catechism and converting thousands, and in preparing many of the captives to suffer the most cruel martyrdom rather than deny the Faith. As a Protestant historian has recently said, none of the expeditions sent against the Barbary States by the Powers of Europe, or even America, equalled "the moral effect produced by the ministry of consolation, and abnegation, going even to the sacrifice of liberty and life, which was exercised by the humble sons of St. John of Matha, St. Peter Nolasco, and St. Vincent of Paul" (Bonet-Maury, "France, christianisme et civilisation", 1907, p. 142).

A second revival of slavery took place after the discovery of the New World by the Spaniards in 1492. To give the history of it would be to exceed the limits of this article. It will be sufficient to recall the efforts of Las Casas in behalf of the aborigines of America and the protestations of popes against the enslavement of those aborigines and the traffic in negro slaves. England, France, Portugal, and Spain, all participated in this nefarious traffic. England only made amends for its transgressions when, in 1815, it took the initiative in the suppression of the slave trade. In 1871 a writer had the temerity to assert that the Papacy had not its mind to condemn slavery" (Ernest Havet, "Le christianisme et ses origines", I, p. xxi). He forgot that, in 1462, Pius II declared slavery to be "a great crime" (magnum scelus); that, in 1537, Paul III forbade the enslavement of the Indians; that Urban VIII forbade it in 1639, and Benedict XIV in 1741; that Pius VII demanded of the Congress of Vienna, in 1815, the suppression of the slave trade and Gregory XVI condemned it in 1839; that, in the Bull of Canonization of the Jesuit Peter Claver, one of the most illustrious adversaries of slavery, Pius IX branded the "supreme villainy" (summum nefas) of the slave traders. Everyone knows of the beautiful letter which Leo XIII, in 1888, addressed to the Brazilian bishops, exhorting them to banish from their country the remnants of slavery — a letter to which the bishops responded with their most energetic efforts, and some generous slave-owners by freeing their slaves in a body, as in the first ages of the Church.

In our own times the slave trade still continued to devastate Africa, no longer for the profit of Christian states, from which all slavery had disappeared, but for the Mussulman countries. But as European penetrations progresses in Africa, the missionaries, who are always its precursors — Fathers of the Holy Ghost, Oblates, White Fathers, Franciscans, Jesuits, Priests of the Mission of Lyons — labour in the Sudan, Guinea, on the Gabun, in the region of the Great Lakes, redeeming slaves and establishing "liberty villages." At the head of this movement appear two men: Cardinal Lavigerie, who in 1888 founded the Société Antiesclavagiste and in 1889 promoted the Brussels conference; Leo XIII, who encouraged Lavigerie in all his projects, and, in 1890, by an Encyclical once more condemning the slave-traders and "the accursed pest of servitude", ordered an annual collection to be made in all Catholic churches for the benefit of the anti-slavery work. Some modern writers, mostly of the Socialist School — Karl Marx, Engel, Ciccotti, and, in a measure, Seligman — attribute the now almost complete disappearance of slavery to the evolution of interests and to economic causes only. The foregoing exposition of the subject is an answer to their materialistic conception of history, as showing that, if not the only, at least the principal, cause of that disappearance is Christianity acting through the authority of its teaching and the influence of its charity."

Nish,
The smoke the priests have been blowing up your ass is toxic. Your  has succumbed to the noxious venom. 

You are a blithering, blathering, gib jabbering, spineless drone.
You're soapbox sizzle, is barely a fizzle. 

Are you forgetting you are not in a room full of mindless parrots?

Answer anything, anything at all in your own words. Are you capable of that? Or does dishonesty coarse that deeply through your veins?

(June 20, 2023 at 4:57 am)no one Wrote:  Or does dishonesty coarse that deeply through your veins?

The endless walls or text from other peoples minds (his own mind is too polluted to have genuine thoughts), the willful ignorance, the dishonesty, the condescension and generally very tribal (= uncivilized) mindset.

...i mean, thats a rhetorical question, isnt it?

I am still wondering tho what Jebus would have to say about his dishonesty. After all Jebus didnt want slavery to be gone but, as we all know asked for "slaves obey your masters, even the cruel ones".

(June 20, 2023 at 5:07 am)Deesse23 Wrote:

(June 20, 2023 at 4:57 am)no one Wrote:  Or does dishonesty coarse that deeply through your veins?

The endless walls or text from other peoples minds (his own mind is too polluted to have genuine thoughts), the willful ignorance, the dishonesty, the condescension and generally very tribal (= uncivilized) mindset.

...i mean, thats a rhetorical question, isnt it?

I am still wondering tho what Jebus would have to say about his dishonesty. After all Jebus didnt want slavery to be gone but, as we all know asked for "slaves obey your masters, even the cruel ones".

That brings up an interesting question. Since the NT makes the tacit case for an endorsement of slavery, wouldn't abolition be anti-Christian?

Boru

(June 20, 2023 at 4:44 am)Nishant Xavier Wrote: Popes repeatedly spoke against it, as the above shows.

Popes spoke against slavery while having slaves, that is hypocrisy. Especially since Pope Nicholas V started slave trade from Africa - one of the many things that you must ignore to remain a Christian.

(June 20, 2023 at 4:44 am)Nishant Xavier Wrote: You still haven't show me any Atheists leading the charge to Abolish Slavery. Quite telling.

That is because deists abolished slavery. Christianity was long abandoned among intellectuals in the western world and replaced with deism:

Quote:Belief in God based on reason rather than revelation or the teaching of any specific religion is known as deism. The word originated in England in the early 17th century as a rejection of orthodox Christianity. Deists asserted that reason could find evidence of God in nature and that God had created the world and then left it to operate under the natural laws devised by God. By the late 18th century, deism was the dominant religious attitude among Europe’s educated classes; it was accepted by many upper-class Americans of the same era, including the first three US presidents.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictiona...ristianity

And deism is very close to being agnosticism.

(June 20, 2023 at 5:28 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:

(June 20, 2023 at 5:07 am)Deesse23 Wrote: The endless walls or text from other peoples minds (his own mind is too polluted to have genuine thoughts), the willful ignorance, the dishonesty, the condescension and generally very tribal (= uncivilized) mindset.

...i mean, thats a rhetorical question, isnt it?

I am still wondering tho what Jebus would have to say about his dishonesty. After all Jebus didnt want slavery to be gone but, as we all know asked for "slaves obey your masters, even the cruel ones".

That brings up an interesting question. Since the NT makes the tacit case for an endorsement of slavery, wouldn't abolition be anti-Christian?

Boru

Exactly

I was almost about to point that out earlier. However the OP is hell bent do spam the forum with BS, clearly not willing to adress very specific issues. As we all know he is doing this because he doesnt want his beliefs (and lies) to be scrutinized. I bet he is already copy pasting parts of our conversations from here, and will claim victory since we
#1 couldnt adress each and every hilariously incorrect statement
#2 couldnt bring individdual points of discussion to an end, because he opened yet another thread about some other silly stuff he wants to peddle

He is, after all, one of the most disingenuous interlocutors we had here lately. I have seen some uninformed ones, maybe some with mental issues, but he...he is deliberately dishonest. Lots of very motivated reasoning, no willingness to have a honest conversation, instead the clear will to win a competition, and that is particularly repugnant, because, unlike those aforementioned, he had a choice. A choice to be not ignorant, to not be a dick, to not misrepresent others, to not broad brush people ("you atheists"), to not baltantly lie.
He already knew better before he came here, but he decided he needs to present him as this particularly repugnant christian, because he thinks that is what his god wants of him.

In the end, he is wasting more of his time than ours. In the end he is sacrificing his entire life (and he has only one) and humanity on the altar of an cruel and immoral system. I am just wasting time trying to talk sense into him. If there is a god, and if he is just, he will know who was the more honest one of the two of us. And if this god doesnt care about intellectual honesty, much like the OP, both can go and f. themselves.
That being said, and considering the level of willful ignorance at display, can we maybe put him in a (discussion) room with Winter? I will pay for popcorn: all you can eat  
Just an idea