(February 13, 2016 at 11:30 am)Nihilist Virus Wrote: You remove the part where I call you a retard only to ask a retarded question which you also place in the wrong quote block.
We may have differing views on rape and slavery but I think I have sufficiently demonstrated my case on your intelligence.
As for your question, we are to presume from the text the beating is typically administered if the slave is not working to the master's satisfaction. Is that any less abusive?
Who said anything about a slave not working to a master's satisfaction?
Look at the History of the Jews. Beating were reserved as punishment for breaking laws. What did you think would happen if a slave stole and sold all of his master's goats? what recourse would the master have? (The law said if you stole live stock you had to pay it back or become a slave) Did you think he would goto Jail? Remember the context in which the law was given (wandering the desert) And if he were to goto Jail, what of the loss the master suffered? And now has to find another slave??? Why not just keep the one you had, 'correct' the bad behaivor with a big stick, and move on?
again no jails, the only way to make things right then was slavery, but if one was already a slave and still messing up, the next stop was the stick!
