You may recognize the following question as a spin-off from the thread by Catholic-Lady about how we determine that some things are good and some things evil. This is a spin-off and not subject to her intentions, stated or denied. I have my own intentions and my hope is that this question will spark an interesting and thought provoking discussion.

Question. Let’s assume, for the sake of argument, that our sense of right and wrong comes from god. Now, since the Judeo/Christian holy books do not prohibit slavery, from where do we get the idea that slavery is evil?

Jewish Scriptures:
Leviticus 25:44-46
However, you may purchase male or female slaves from among the foreigners who live among you. You may also purchase the children of such resident foreigners, including those who have been born in your land. You may treat them as your property, passing them on to your children as a permanent inheritance. You may treat your slaves like this, but the people of Israel, your relatives, must never be treated this way.

Since god says they are not to treat other Jews this way, this is obviously slavery based on race.

Christian Scriptures
Ephesians 6:5
Slaves, obey your earthly masters with deep respect and fear. Serve them sincerely as you would serve Christ.

When a man asked Jesus to heal his slave, Jesus did not rebuke him for having a slave in the first place, but declared that he had never seen such faith. (Luke 7:3-9)

Now fast forward to the 21st century. We have folks declaring that slavery is a great evil against men kind. This is not a question of why the Bible doesn’t speak against slavery. I’ve heard the explanations. But this question asks instead from where did we get the a priori idea to when god clearly had no problem with it.

Quote:this is obviously slavery based on race.

A meaningless term when this crap was concocted.  This was tribal thinking.  Archaeology has shown that there was precious little difference between the Canaanites and the so-called "Jews."  Until the Persian era they were virtually indistinguishable.

I don't believe that anyone can really make a strong case as to why slavery in on its own is evil. You can make the emotional arguments. Like Matt D on the atheist experience will always ask, Do you want to be a slave? And of course no one in this day and age would say yes. But you can't really make a logical reasoned argument for why it is wrong or immoral without appealing to emotions. Its easy to say that its wrong to make another human your property but why isn't it the same as a sports league? I know that this will get quickly shot down because of reasons like the fact that Kobe Bryant can walk away from basketball at any moment and he is free to roam about as he wants. But we have to remember that until just a couple hundred years ago, humans in general worked 10-12 hours a day doing laborious jobs. Its not like they even had the free time to go anywhere, or even the ability to go more than a couple miles.

But the problem is that we always think back to slavery in the south or have an imagined view of slavery where they're all chained up at night time. I don't know if thats how slavery in the bible worked. I believe that they did have certain freedoms but free or not you would be stuck doing labor 6 days a week. I know this isn't a popular view but I am curious if anyone has thoughts on slavery that don't appeal to emotions

Holy fallacious dishonest strawman category error, Batman!

[/quote]

Archaeology has shown that there was precious little difference between the Canaanites and the so-called "Jews."  Until the Persian era they were virtually indistinguishable.
[/quote]

Is that a problem for theists? Jews were just the offspring of Abraham whom god made a covenant with.

(June 24, 2015 at 11:48 am)Rhondazvous Wrote: [...] But this question asks instead from where did we get the a priori idea to when god clearly had no problem with it.

It's very simple - it turned out, that in the industrial era it's way cheaper to hire nominally "free" workers for minimal wages, instead of paying for slaves, their transport, food, shelter and medicine. Moral objections were an afterthought.

(June 24, 2015 at 12:18 pm)Won2blv Wrote: I know that this will get quickly shot down because of reasons like the fact that Kobe Bryant can walk away from basketball at any moment and he is free to roam about as he wants.

It's not just that Bryant (or any athlete) has the freedom to walk away. It's that he entered into his NBA contract voluntarily. Bryant wanted to be a professional basketball player, and followed that desire through to its end. Pursuing a career and entering into contracts voluntarily isn't slavery.

I think the case against slavery would be one of the harm it does to people, in that they are being either imprisoned or forced to work against their will. Some will extend this to situations such as factory work in the USA before the advent of unions, where workers sought out jobs that required long hours and poor conditions for poor pay and even changing conditions (ie, they might wind up being asked to do work they did not sign up for, on threat of loss of pay or loss of the job). A case can be made that even that latter situation, which isn't slavery in the technical sense, is nonetheless harmful to people. Is it evil, or wicked, or immoral? I suppose most people would consider it to be.

I would think that slavery would make it harder for poor, free people to climb out of poverty. How do you compete with free labor?

I was watching a documentary about the KKK in NC. Apparently, wealthy southerners looked down on poor, white 'trash' and poor whites comforted themselves by looking down on blacks. It made me wonder what would have happened if blacks and poor whites have joined together to change things. Slavery and racism, at least in the south, kept apart two groups that should have worked together. Does anyone think that it is reasonable to say that slavery hurts not just the enslaved but the free lower classes also? If so, it seems as if slavery only benefits a small group of wealthy people so it isn't good for most of society.

(June 24, 2015 at 12:18 pm)Won2blv Wrote: I don't believe that anyone can really make a strong case as to why slavery in on its own is evil. You can make the emotional arguments. Like Matt D on the atheist experience will always ask, Do you want to be a slave? And of course no one in this day and age would say yes. But you can't really make a logical reasoned argument for why it is wrong or immoral without appealing to emotions. Its easy to say that its wrong to make another human your property but why isn't it the same as a sports league? I know that this will get quickly shot down because of reasons like the fact that Kobe Bryant can walk away from basketball at any moment and he is free to roam about as he wants. But we have to remember that until just a couple hundred years ago, humans in general worked 10-12 hours a day doing laborious jobs. Its not like they even had the free time to go anywhere, or even the ability to go more than a couple miles.

  But the problem is that we always think back to slavery in the south or have an imagined view of slavery where they're all chained up at night time. I don't know if thats how slavery in the bible worked. I believe that they did have certain freedoms but free or not you would be stuck doing labor 6 days a week. I know this isn't a popular view but I am curious if anyone has thoughts on slavery that don't appeal to emotions

Why can't morality appeal to emotions?  Would starting an argument based on consent be appealing to emotions in your opinion?

A specific example:
there's a guy I know from 12 Steppers that does way better when he's in the Salvation Army program. While he acknowledges that, he also hates their program. I'm aware of his specific complaints and while I concur, I have also noted, when the SA folks work with him to establish better living skills and an independent place for him to live, he invariably fucks up.

I find myself (uncomfortably) wishing he would hook up with a 'dom' who could go the 'extra mile' with him and provide a highly structured environment for him to live in. Al isn't too receptive about anything like that.

But he will die if he doesn't find something that provides the structure/control/discipline he 'needs' (IMO) but doesn't necessarily want.


I'm damn tired of finding out people I know from the 12 Steppers orbit being found dead in some awful circumstance, and I acknowledge I don't therefore have the right to impose anything on Al 'for his own good', but it doesn't stop me from wanting to.