setting a watchman

[Thumpalumpacus]

I love how "stumped"-alumpacus thinks that his narrow minded POV can only be the only POV when he posts a simple picture.

For instance stumpy may see an impossible situation to get out of, while i see an opportunity to engage someone on a different plan of thought.

Stumps: "digging a hole he can't get out of"

Me: Not my hole. As such not afraid to talk about it.

lol, I'm not stumped about anything. Your "plan of thought" (whatever that means!) is hampered by your limited thought itself. As I said earlier in this thread, it is an homage to post hoc thinking.

I understand that there are other opinions besides my own; I just don't classify the ones you've posted here as meriting much discussion at all, because you seem terribly ignorant of facts. And opinions without facts strike me as simply one more jackoff on the Interwebz shouting into the wind. You're clearly unaware of even simple facts like Africa being very resource-rich, and also showing that you're unable to synthesize information such as the effects of colonialism on the continent, or its residual effects in terms of corporate leasing of those resources. There's a reason why Nigeria, with copious oil reserves, is still relatively poverty-stricken, and it's due to the fact that colonialism installed companies to harvest resources while the people who live there are still left in poverty.

But for some Reason™, you'd prefer to ascribe it to race.

If you want engagement, you'll need to offer substance. Until then you only merit scorn, contempt, and mockery.

Don't like it? Do something about it.

From my perspective, when the only things you can do are toss up ahisotrical opinions and make fun of my name like the second-grader you are mentally, you're only reinforcing my view that your views don't merit serious consideration.

It's not my problem, but you're welcome to spend another hour replying with anther wallofshit.

---

1) I identify slavery as being a morally neutral institution   equal.

Of course you do. If you acknowledged slavery for the evil that it was and is, you'd have to acknowledge that the society your little god set up (according to the Old Testament) is evil in part as well; you'd have to deny the alleged perfection of your god, and you cannot do that, because that alleged moral perfection is the crux of your belief.

If your Bible were shown to be correct, your god would be shown to be evil. You cannot admit that, so instead you prefer slavery-apologetics.

Shit like this is exactly why religion is a negative influence on humanity. You'd rather justify owning people than admit error. And that makes you a cunt.

[Amarok]

I love how "stumped"-alumpacus thinks that his narrow minded POV can only be the only POV when he posts a simple picture.

For instance stumpy may see an impossible situation to get out of, while i see an opportunity to engage someone on a different plan of thought.

Stumps: "digging a hole he can't get out of"

Me: Not my hole. As such not afraid to talk about it.

lol, I'm not stumped about anything. Your "plan of thought" (whatever that means!) is hampered by your limited thought itself. As I said earlier in this thread, it is an homage to post hoc thinking.

I understand that there are other opinions besides my own; I just don't classify the ones you've posted here as meriting much discussion at all, because you seem terribly ignorant of facts. And opinions without facts strike me as simply one more jackoff on the Interwebz shouting into the wind. You're clearly unaware of even simple facts like Africa being very resource rich, and als unable to synthesize information such as the effects of colonialism on the continent.

If you want engagement, you'll need to offer substance. Until then you only merit scorn, contempt, and mockery.

Don't like it? Do something about it.

From my perspective, when the only things you can do are toss up ahisotrical opinions and make fun of my name like the second-grader you are, you're only reinforcing my view that your views don't merit serious consideration.

It's not my problem, but you're welcome to spend another hour replying with anther wallofshit.

Not to mention he's ignorant that Africa has produced powerful empires to rival Persia, Rome or the Ottomans . And have throughout history been at the forefront of technology and science.

[JackRussell]

Bible glasses are more like superglued contact lenses with some, they can never remove them, even to consider a differing POV.

[Amarok]

Really fantastic series by BBC on this called 

The Lost Kingdoms Of Africa

[Shell B]

Can you just do a few bullet points?

[Amarok]

1) I identify slavery as being a morally neutral institution   equal.

Which sums your character up perfectly

[LadyForCamus]

Slavery is neither a good, nor a bad thing, inherently. It's how slaves are obtained and how they are kept that evil can be fund. what most of you forget is most of the world elects slavery over the alternative, even today!

Says the guy who's never been one, ever. Drich, I wonder...how does your wife refrain from instantly barfing every morning that she wakes up next to you? 😏

Yes, Drich. Owning humans as property is morally wrong. And no, I'm not going to debate you on it, you lil' fuckin' weirdo!

[Amarok]

Slavery is neither a good, nor a bad thing, inherently.

Yes it's bad regardless 

 It's how slaves are obtained and how they are kept that evil can be fund. 

No it does not matter how nice slave are treated . Owning someone else or praying on their vulnerability is bullshit. 

what most of you forget is most of the world elects slavery over the alternative, even today!

Most of the world elects for a lot of terrible shit . That does not make it not terrible .

[downbeatplumb]

Really fantastic series by BBC on this called 

The Lost Kingdoms Of Africa

I just read the part on the powerful African empires in Andrew Marrs History of the world. They were in the middles ages the equal of any European empire in scope and complexity but suffered from repeated invasions by foreign powers, initially muslim then later European.

[chimp3]

You did not answer my questions. Instead you try to give me a history lesson.

The history lesson was your answer.
1) I identify slavery as being a morally neutral institution  
2) american slavery was not across the board "roots bad" Underscoring point one in history there are both good and bad examples of slavery
3) Even if it were "roots bad," in Korean people migrating to the US after 1950 we have examples of people who across the board had it "roots bad" when imperial Japan annexed the Korean peninsula after WWI, Kill all the royal families enslaved their children and put them to work in their own family's farms for 50+ years and still they Meaning the generation who were enslaved (being hated by the americans (back and white) who were at war with them) had nothing to over come outside their own pride. Which is why so many come here and by even our own standard become successful.

So you see I did answer your question with a history lesson. why? because you can't argue historical fact. Slavery doesn't/didn't just touch black skin. yet black people seem to be stuck on it, while other races simply move past it. again why? Harper Lee has a great answer.

---

---

"Setting a Watchman" was not conceived by Harper Lee. It was a typical excuse by white supremacists like Jefferson Davis and Thomas Jefferson.

I identify slavery as always morally evil. That is because freedom has great value to me. I must extend that to others.

I dare you to provide an example of "good slavery". Name one human being who this was "good" for.