Tweet
Originally posted by NorthAlabama
View Post
-
It's great that you enjoyed your experiences in life, that doesn't justify playing down the experiences of others that you didn't have. Just like my last post, I will point out that you knew who your great aunt was and got to speak with her. Your quote from her is also extremely selective. Yes, I may not miss a new Aston Martin that I never owned, but I also wouldn't miss the experience of breaking a leg or being shot in the arm. -
Let's go backwards to find the root. KJV states that Masters and Servants are valid (with commands), so-called slavery is valid. How does one get put into servitude 1) defeated in war 2) born into servitude, are spoken of that I remember. Question: Did the African get placed into servitude (chained in Africa) that meets legal and Religious standards? Answer that one.Last edited by NorthAlabama; 07-08-2021, 04:53 PM.Comment
-
Why would you care about the legal standards when they are not tied to religious standards? A lot of people would also argue that the African Slave Trade does NOT meet traditional Old Testament standards of slavery, due to the drastic change in definitions of the term "slavery". I may be wrong, but doesn't the KJV also only refer to "servants" rather than specifically the term "slaves"? I could be wrong but when I last read the KJV, I only recall a few uses of the word bondsman which would be the closest thing to a concrete slave, though that word also had very different meaning for its time.Originally posted by NorthAlabama View PostComment
-
Maybe we can work together to find the main answer. That is why I asked, because a lot of research information that I'm digging for is not fool proof and cannot be validated, to take the captured African, mostly opinions. This is what is known. War lords (like Tip-pa-too) and Kings (like Heroin) captured Africans for trade, different reasons. Question: Were these Africans captured under wrongful means? Tribal warfare? But the Shippers did save their lives, for they would have starved to death in African prisons run by Africans. In away, Afro Americans should be grateful to the white man. Then here the contract agreements between the white men, are they truly valid if the captured are take by wrong means? Then who is should pay the debts?Comment
-
I'll be honest this feels like a trick question but I'll answer honestly. There are little to no correct forms of slavery. Ancient European, Islamic, African and any other forms are all wrong even if at different levels. I find the claim that slaves were being saved is very bad. African slaves weren't simply prisoners in West Central Africa. They were specifically kidnapped for the sake of being sold in the trade. In most regions where the slave trade focused, those lands were observed at the time to have a fraction of the level of slaves prior to the arrival of European traders. To suggest that African Americans should be thankful for their treatment and kidnapping is basically on the level of saying Native Americans should be thankful for the Trail of Tears happening. To answer the last part, I'm not sure what you mean by debts as I'm not one that believes in direct reparations in the present day. If you don't mean those kinds of debts, you'll have to elaborate further.Originally posted by NorthAlabama View PostComment
-
Not asking for your opinion. I'm asking the law of the land per say on your knowledge base on how valid Africans can capture Africans and trade them to Shippers. But I see your left wing opinion matters more than truth, your zipped mouth. I reached out to you, trying to be nice to you, you are a Troll by definition.Comment
-
You literally asked a question of me about whether or not African slaves were wrongfully captured, not if they were legally captured. At this point I don't even know what you are asking, then. Of course these practices were allowed in these regions at the time, but what does that have to do with anything being discussed? How is it reaching out if you can't even properly form your questions? I read your question and answered it based on how you worded it, how is that trolling?Comment
-
and you didn't even answer the most basic question of what debt you were talking about.Comment
-
If he called it reparation would you understand what he meant better? Asking for a friend.Where is the move over flag when you need it?????Comment
-
Nobody made these bad people capture and sell them as slaves. The responsibility for this lies on them for their own actions...Originally posted by Osiris1241 View Post
You do know that paying reparations is a totally fabricated agenda that has totally no validity...
Just stirring up someblack people for political gain is the whole idea. Created by telling these people that they are victims. A total lie!!!If you're not outraged, you're not paying attention!Comment
-
@BBQ, yes that would clear it up a lot more, actually. @Buford, I literally said in the post you quoted that direct reparations aren't the answer.Comment
-
Why has the left termed the word "slavery" to be such a bad term? The word is used exclusively throughout the Bible. It referred to a person or people who became destitute and would be taken in and allowed to earn their keep. Then after 6 years, they would be set free. Even then, because they were treated so well, as commanded, many would stay with their master permanently!Comment
-
that may be one of the longest stretches to accuse the left of something. Somebody should've told southern slaveholders that they were only allowed to keep willing people's and only keep them for 6 years. Especially when they referred to their slaves as... Slaves.Originally posted by ZERO25 View PostComment
-
-
I guess I don't see your point. Slavery in the USA never fell under that definition. It somewhat did in the very early colonial days (I think it was NA who brought up a man that was part of the transition from temporary/punishment enslavement to full on, permanent slavery) The idea of what slavery was definitely changed, but that change came at the latest in the 19th century, not the last 50 yearsComment
Comment