pop morality

[downbeatplumb]

I think what Drich is arguing for is a more moral form of society based on communism, where everyone gains equally by labour. You get slavery in capitalist or feudal systems.

No... Communism is slavery to the state. how is that better?

Ah communism, another word you don't know the meaning.

In political and social sciences, communism (from Latin communis, "common, universal") is a social, political, and economic ideology and movement whose ultimate goal is the establishment of the communist society, which is a socioeconomic order structured upon the common ownership of the means of production and the absence of social classes, money and the state.

So communism is pretty much the opposite of what you think it is. (Do not confuse Stalinist Russia, China etc for communist states. They were communist in name only, just as Disney is not really "the happiest place on earth")

[Drich]

-and yet here I remain in opposition to slavery, sub standard wages, and substandard working conditions...whilst you defend them and claim their necessity (regardless of how idiotically you've defined them).  I don't really know whether or not I'm a better man than my grandfather (or yours)........but I know enough about you to make a comparison.  

Hey, retard, we want the same things! I am just not willing to relable slavery just to pretend I am better than anyone else.
..And you do, that is why your mind closes tight around the points you have already made, ignoring the rest of my argument.
I want to defend Fair trade slavery. a slavery system that pays a fair wage that does not exploit the people working under it. we need need third world people working as slaves just as they need us to buy their products and keep them working.

I take my right to look down upon you from your own comments, nothing else.  You can no more competently defend yourself in this regard than you can defend your god, and so, instead, you babble ceaselessly about the flaws of others...real or imagined.....just as you do for god.

from all the material you just omitted in this very abbreviated response, it would seem you are the one having trouble defending your position! where is all of the pomp and arrogance of your last post now?!?, where is the proud propaganda deluded rhythm that told me no slaves went back to Africa?!?!, where is the guy.. better yet where are all the counterpoints you threw up defending your propaganda view of slavery?!?! Why haven't you addressed or even conceded the counterpoints I gave?!?

Yet you say I can't defend my points?!?!?!

Delusions of grandeur personified that's what I think of you Mario!

Normally I don't do a victory lap and rub your faces in the poo you dump in my threads, after i expose it for what it is. unless someone like you assumes that I don't know I just kicked your teeth in with History and or Fact, or assumes wrongly that something prevents me from kicking your teeth in after an exchange like this. Know i don't do the typical inzone dance that atheist do because i choose not to, not because i can't. And I am fully aware each and every time one of you backs out of an argument or defaults to logical fallacy to save face.

So next time you want to do a victory lap, make sure that you won the race first!

For me the answer is no. EVEN If it means I get labeled 'evil' by those who live by the rules of pop culture. To me that does not sound like an unfair cost.

For you the answer is that it's necessary, and that many depend upon it, that god allows it, and that all moral systems are insufficient and irrelevant to it.  Or had you forgotten?  I have to ask, are you now attempting to paint yourself as being compassionate, or in opposition to those things which you've spent page after page defending?  Do you think anyone will buy it, after all of that?

...
The statement above does not contradict anything I have said previously. I guess my last post wrecked you so hard you don't even know if you are coming or going.

[Drich]

No... Communism is slavery to the state. how is that better?

Ah communism, another word you don't know the meaning.

In political and social sciences, communism (from Latin communis, "common, universal") is a social, political, and economic ideology and movement whose ultimate goal is the establishment of the communist society, which is a socioeconomic order structured upon the common ownership of the means of production and the absence of social classes, money and the state.

So communism is pretty much the opposite of what you think it is. (Do not confuse Stalinist Russia, China etc for communist states. They were communist in name only, just as Disney is not really "the happiest place on earth")

Ah.. delusion...

Hey, 'smart guy' if Russia and China are the only two success stories of communism guess what!?!? THAT IS WHAT REAL COMMUNISM IS!!!! Despite What People Who Do Nothing More Than Discuss It Think!!!

[Drich]

Is it worth it? For me the answer is no. EVEN If it means I get labeled 'evil' by those who live by the rules of pop culture. To me that does not sound like an unfair cost.

... said Osama bin Laden, right before he launched the attacks against the Great Satan.  

You don't think he had full support of his 'pop culture?'

What's interesting... Christianity stands in opposition of both pop cultures. yours and his.

[The Grand Nudger]

Hey, retard, we want the same things! I am just not willing to relable slavery just to pretend I am better than anyone else.

I doubt the truth of either of those statements.  

..And you do, that is why your mind closes tight around the points you have already made, ignoring the rest of my argument.

It doesn't matter whether you choose to call substandard wages, substandard conditions, and slavery "slavery" - since I'm not behind or in support of -any- of those things.  That you think you have an argument for there to be a "rest of" at all is further evidence of your incompetence.  

I want to defend Fair trade slavery. a slavery system that pays a fair wage that does not exploit the people working under it. we need need third world people working as slaves just as they need us to buy their products and keep them working.

The man who wants the same things I do wants to defend "fair trade slavery"..........lol. Let me guess, you like it because it has the word "fair" in it?

 from all the material you just omitted in this very abbreviated response, it would seem you are the one having trouble defending your position! where is all of the pomp and arrogance of your last post now?!?, where is the proud propaganda deluded rhythm that told me no slaves went back to Africa?!?!, where is the guy.. better yet where are all the counterpoints you threw up defending your propaganda view of slavery?!?! Why haven't you addressed or even conceded the counterpoints I gave?!?

Lets address these in order of idiocy.  I omitted a great deal because, like most of your posts, it was nine tenths re-assertion.  "Rhythm", proud or otherwise, never told you "no slaves went back to africa" you have an overactive imagination.  You have no counterpoints.  You wish to dragh me through the mud you willingly bow down in.  Too bad.  I;m not like you, I don't want what you want, I don't believe what you believe.  

Yet you say I can't defend my points?!?!?!

You've been doing a swell job thusfar.........

Delusions of grandeur personified that's what I think of you Mario!

Normally I don't do a victory lap and rub your faces in the poo you dump in my threads, after i expose it for what it is. unless someone like you assumes that I don't know I just kicked your teeth in with History and or Fact, or assumes wrongly that something prevents me from kicking your teeth in after an exchange like this. Know i don't do the typical inzone dance that atheist do because i choose not to, not because i can't. And I am fully aware each and every time one of you backs out of an argument or defaults to logical fallacy to save face.

So next time you want to do a victory lap, make sure that you won the race first

  All of this from the man who thinks he has a personal relationship with a god?  Perhaps you should work to achieve a greater command of history, fact, or logic?  

...
The statement above does not contradict anything I have said previously. I guess my last post wrecked you so hard you don't even know if you are coming or going.

OFC it doesn't...I was summarizing your position.  If any of it were contradictory to something you'd said.............it wouldn't be a summary of your position.  Where you seem to have lost your shit, is in imagining that we are having a debate about history, facts, even slavery.  We are not.  I clearly understand your position, and I think it's vile.  

It doesn't matter how loosely you've played with history or facts, it doesn't matter what you chose to include in your massive whineposts about slavery.  I oppose all of those things you call slavery, while you defend their moral status and necessity.

Sometimes I try to step back and be nice. I'm reminded that it's a mistake each and every time, with you. Your compulsion to lie for christ has caused you to misspeak, voluminously, on the subject of slavery. You are now abandoning the position you've labored for days to build. Be my guest, it's abhorrent...but don't think you'll slip quietly out the back gates and into the woods. I'll be pointing, booing, and shining a light the whole sorry way.

Am I up to my quota on answering your bullshit now drich, do you feel I've responded exhaustively enough fo you massa?

[Nihilist Virus]

So... when God said that the slave owners could use the virgins as "breeding fodder" or whatever it is you said, this was a righteous commandment?

yes.

Again Righteousness is not assigned by evaluating action and judging it good or bad. It is following the command of God.

[Edwardo Piet]

And I answered your other question in post 471

No you didn't, that isn't even your post. That's Downbeatplumb's post.

Again,

My issue is with you saying it's not immoral. Do you believe slavery is immoral?

[TheRocketSurgeon]

For F*CK'S SAKE!!

I typed a huge, individually-detailed response, and before I could click "Post Reply", it discarded all my freakin' text!

I'm not typing that bullshit again.

TL;dr version:

1) You need to read the articles you cite more closely. The Inca did not have the type of slaves we're talking about, and the deaths to which you refer were the king's servants, along with a host of other people, who were sacrificed in his "honor". The article specifically states that their economic system was not a slave system:

"The economy of the Inca Empire has been characterized as involving a high degree of central planning. While evidence of trade between the Inca Empire and outside regions has been uncovered, there is no evidence that the Incas had a substantial internal market economy. While axe-monies were used along the northern coast, presumably by the provincial mindaláe trading class, most inhabitants of the empire would have lived in a traditional economy in which male heads of household were required to pay taxes both in kind (e.g., crops, textiles, etc.) and in the form of the mit'a corvée labor and military obligations, though barter (or trueque) was also present in some areas. In return, the state provided security, food in times of hardship through the supply of emergency resources, agricultural projects (e.g. aqueducts and terraces) to increase productivity, and occasional feasts. The economy rested on the material foundations of the vertical archipelago, a system of ecological complementarity in accessing resources, and the cultural foundation of ayni, or reciprocal exchange."

(Mit'a Corvée was a system of required public service to the state, and was not a system of individual slave ownership, but of an expectation of shared labor among all Inca.)

2) No matter how you bend it, economic exploitation is not the same as slavery. Slavery is easily defined as the ownership of a person as property by another person. The other situations are bad, exploitative, and worthy of discussion as potential "also morally wrong" issues, but they are not slavery.

3) No matter how much you try to manipulate our emotions or divert the subject, you will never get away from one basic fact:

Gawd Awl'maihty could have ordered the Israelites not to practice slavery, and being the Creator of the Universe™ instead of a lowly human priest/prophet, might have had better advice for how to conduct ourselves in the absence of exploitation than we humans could devise on our own... instead, Gawd Awl'maighty decided to worry about menstrual blood, foreskins, and sodomy. Since this conversation primarily revolves (when you're not trying to distract us from that fact) around whether your religion and its scriptures constitute a superior alternative to what you're choosing to label "pop" morality, the fact that your book endorses something we'd expect to see from Ancient Near East humanity but not from a being that surpasses all time and space In His Perfect Morality™ seems more than a little relevant.

Thus, as we keep pointing out to you and you keep ignoring, your tu quoque arguments are a win for our side, not for yours.

[Edwardo Piet]

For F*CK'S SAKE!!

I typed a huge, individually-detailed response, and before I could click "Post Reply", it discarded all my freakin' text!

Know that feel bro. It sucks donkey balls when that happens.

This is why nowadays when my post starts becoming a large size I copypasta it into Word and continue it there out of fear that I'll lose it all.

[Nihilist Virus]

For F*CK'S SAKE!!

I typed a huge, individually-detailed response, and before I could click "Post Reply", it discarded all my freakin' text!

Did it say something like the specified thread does not exist? I believe that's because the text box is being overflowed. There is apparently a character limit. Try to abbreviate quotations with ellipses or something.

Anyways, the lost post should be recoverable if you just go back in your browser. You'll be at the reply screen with your text still there.