RE: pop morality
February 13, 2016 at 12:28 pm
(This post was last modified: February 13, 2016 at 12:30 pm by TheRocketSurgeon.)
(February 13, 2016 at 11:58 am)Jörmungandr Wrote:(February 13, 2016 at 11:04 am)Drich Wrote: see above post
The bible speaks of chattel slavery. To equate it with wage slavery is dishonest. Wage slavery may be an undesirable situation, but it is better than having no work at all, or being a chattel slave. The irony is that because the dictionary includes a lesser definition of slavery, you want to equivocate on the difference between the two. The slavery taught in the bible and the 'slavery' you are referring to are not the same thing. Take your pettifogging nonsense and shove it.
What the dictionary includes is the colloquial use, which is different from its literal definition in the context of this conversation. When Britney Spears sang "I'm a slave for you", I don't think she referred to the literal definition of slavery, but the one you're trying to shoehorn in, here.
A slave is a person literally owned as property by the other person. Wage slavery, while often cruel, is not the same thing. If you'd like to see what modern day "slavery" looks like (and I'm actually with Drich that it exists and is the moral equivalent of the real thing), consider the following:
Real slavery does continue to exist, both in the United States and elsewhere. One is the prisoners of many states, in which they are forced to work, even in cotton fields, for as little as $10 a month (no, that's not a typo!), just enough to buy toothpaste and shampoo. A little-known fact is that the 13th amendment did not ban slavery entirely: Amendment XIII, Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
That bolded bit is, according to sociologists I've read and spoken to on the subject, a huge part of the reason our modern court system has become so eroded and racially skewed, and minorities are vastly over-represented in the prisons of this nation. In the Jim Crow era, in the South and Midwest, it was a way to continue effective slavery conditions in defiance of the federal government's passage of the amendment; it has morphed over time into the modern chimera that is our "Justice" System.
There's the abusive type of employment, which can often stretch to the point which I would refer to it as slavery, and again it's in the United States while everyone looks the other way and enjoys their cheap fruits/veggies at the supermarket. If you haven't seen the movie Cesar Chavez, which came out in 2014, I highly recommend it. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1621046/
The other and more commonly referred to version is sex slavery, which frankly I blame on religious types who have made prostitution an illegal and thus hidden thing upon which those types of predators may (and do) prey, in the dark.
http://traffickingresourcecenter.org/
But all of this is beside the point, Mr. "Bible-Based Christian". Your Bible specifically, in those words, encourages chattel slavery (not the kind you are redefining here), making me more than a little bit skeptical of your claim that any sort of transcendent morality is to be found in the book:
Leviticus 25 Wrote:44 "Your male and female slaves are to come from the nations around you; from them you may buy slaves. 45 You may also buy some of the temporary residents living among you and members of their clans born in your country, and they will become your property. 46 You can bequeath them to your children as inherited property and can make them slaves for life, but you must not rule over your fellow Israelites ruthlessly."
(I used the NIV, but I can happily change that to your favorite translation, if you'll divulge what version that might be.)
A Christian told me: if you were saved you cant lose your salvation. you're sealed with the Holy Ghost
I replied: Can I refuse? Because I find the entire concept of vicarious blood sacrifice atonement to be morally abhorrent, the concept of holding flawed creatures permanently accountable for social misbehaviors and thought crimes to be morally abhorrent, and the concept of calling something "free" when it comes with the strings of subjugation and obedience perhaps the most morally abhorrent of all... and that's without even going into the history of justifying genocide, slavery, rape, misogyny, religious intolerance, and suppression of free speech which has been attributed by your own scriptures to your deity. I want a refund. I would burn happily rather than serve the monster you profess to love.
I replied: Can I refuse? Because I find the entire concept of vicarious blood sacrifice atonement to be morally abhorrent, the concept of holding flawed creatures permanently accountable for social misbehaviors and thought crimes to be morally abhorrent, and the concept of calling something "free" when it comes with the strings of subjugation and obedience perhaps the most morally abhorrent of all... and that's without even going into the history of justifying genocide, slavery, rape, misogyny, religious intolerance, and suppression of free speech which has been attributed by your own scriptures to your deity. I want a refund. I would burn happily rather than serve the monster you profess to love.