I'm sure as you've stated those slaves were quite pleased to be treated very well like employees. Yeah right, I'm pretty sure then you wouldn't mind taking their places since you believe they were treated so well. :roll:
Peace
Actually it is incorrect to say a slave is a slave is a slave, as catefrancis did. If I were a slave during that era, yes, I absolutely would have wanted to be in their place, instead of in the hands of one of the southern slave owners. Keep it in perspective.
please explain to me how it is incorrect to say that a slave is a slave is slave. slaves are owned as possessions. would you like to be owned?? by another human who is your equal?? youre excusing the owning of humans by other humans by saying there were differing degrees of slavery. how the fuck does that work? my perspective on slavery is of one human owning another? whats yours??
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
so you'd go on record as believing that every last slave owner raped their slaves?
There couldn't possibly be any female slave owners, right (actually the princess of Hawaii owned slaves, but she isn't a good example, cos she actually did have sex with a bunch of them...oh, and she was black too..talk about killing the stereotype of what a slave owner was..oy)?
There couldn't have been one single man so enamoured with his wife, or so against the horrendous practice, that they didn't rape their slaves?
There was one slave owner, in Brazil I think, I'd have to search...He had a friend over who was admiring the breasts of one of the slaves. The owner had her breasts cut off to give them to the friend. Yes, there are absolutely different levels of treatment from slave owners.
...
No. I'm simply in agreement with Cate Frances' original assessment that 'A Slave is A Slave'... and counter to your view that, while all slavery is bad... some forms of slavery are worse than others, thus tolerable, at best. That, 'well, it could be worse' outlook might work from an outsider, looking in. I have never been in position where I was not afforded freedom... so, I really can't say. All I can do is imagine what it would be like to lose my freedom.
That's all.
...
And certainly... while our founding Fathers were abolishonists, they were still owners of slaves. I don't hold this against them... and I fully believe in the Constitution they crafted. That was just the way of the world, circa 1776. But, I hold them as who and what they are and do not gloss over or rationalize their choices.
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
0
g under p
Surfing The far side of THE Sombrero Galaxy Posts: 18,200
I'm sure as you've stated those slaves were quite pleased to be treated very well like employees. Yeah right, I'm pretty sure then you wouldn't mind taking their places since you believe they were treated so well. :roll:
Peace
Actually it is incorrect to say a slave is a slave is a slave, as catefrancis did. If I were a slave during that era, yes, I absolutely would have wanted to be in their place, instead of in the hands of one of the southern slave owners. Keep it in perspective.
please explain to me how it is incorrect to say that a slave is a slave is slave. slaves are owned as possessions. would you like to be owned?? by another human who is your equal?? youre excusing the owning of humans by other humans by saying there were differing degrees of slavery. how the fuck does that work? my perspective on slavery is of one human owning another? whats yours??[/quote]
It appears she's trying to find some justification in all this that some slaves were treated better than others and therefore that's makes that treatment ok in the eyes of an abolitionist. Maybe she should take a look at the series ROOTS.
Peace
*We CAN bomb the World to pieces, but we CAN'T bomb it into PEACE*...Michael Franti
*MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
.....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti
*The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)
Actually it is incorrect to say a slave is a slave is a slave, as catefrancis did. If I were a slave during that era, yes, I absolutely would have wanted to be in their place, instead of in the hands of one of the southern slave owners. Keep it in perspective.
please explain to me how it is incorrect to say that a slave is a slave is slave. slaves are owned as possessions. would you like to be owned?? by another human who is your equal?? youre excusing the owning of humans by other humans by saying there were differing degrees of slavery. how the fuck does that work? my perspective on slavery is of one human owning another? whats yours??
It appears she's trying to find some justification in all this that some slaves were treated better than others and therefore that's makes that treatment ok in the eyes of an abolitionist. Maybe she should take a look at the series ROOTS.
Peace
i dont know what fluttergirl is trying to do and that is why im seeking clarification. im trying to understand her thinking of this matter. but right now im struggling to do so cause to me there are not degrees of slavery. either one is a slave and therefore owned by another human or one is free and the agent of their own life.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
0
g under p
Surfing The far side of THE Sombrero Galaxy Posts: 18,200
Actually it is incorrect to say a slave is a slave is a slave, as catefrancis did. If I were a slave during that era, yes, I absolutely would have wanted to be in their place, instead of in the hands of one of the southern slave owners. Keep it in perspective.
It appears she's trying to find some justification in all this that some slaves were treated better than others and therefore that's makes that treatment ok in the eyes of an abolitionist. Maybe she should take a look at the series ROOTS.
Peace
i dont know what fluttergirl is trying to do and that is why im seeking clarification. im trying to understand her thinking of this matter. but right now im struggling to do so cause to me there are not degrees of slavery. either one is a slave and therefore owned by another human or one is free and the agent of their own life.
I understand what you're saying, I tend to feel these slaves got the feeling more from the words in this song by Living Colour...Nothingness. The one good is that form of slavery didn't last forever even though we now today have other forms of slavery which doesn't make their treatment ANY better no matter who owns them.
A slave is a slave period.
Peace
*We CAN bomb the World to pieces, but we CAN'T bomb it into PEACE*...Michael Franti
*MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
.....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti
*The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)
To add to what I was saying about religion...one has to understand where the founders were coming from. Under British rule they were forced to be Protestant by the government. Anything else had to be practiced in secrecy. One cannot ignore the fact that these were God fearing men of various beliefs (and one or two athiests..if I recall correctly..). They wanted to ensure a freedom to practice all their beliefs out in public without fear of persecution. That is why the Constitution is written the way it was. They did not want the government to have the power, under any circumstance, to tell them they cannot show their religious beliefs in any way. They made sure it would be unconstitutional for the government to stop, or say no to, any display of religion, private or public, even on government property.
Exactly. Which is why state action that is religious in nature is unconstititutional... aka... your government cannot put up a nativity scene or hang the 10 commandments in a court room, because it is akin to the government in that place endorsing one religion as the officially recognized one in that community. Just like the British did with Protestantism. No, the government cannot limit the ability of private citizens like the Danbury Baptists to practice their religion openly. But that doesn't mean that the government can openly adopt or endorse their views either. The protection of free exercise is for citizens, not the government.
I appreciate your in depth post RE the founding fathers, but I'm still not convinced. There is a lot of rhetoric about the evil of slavery, but they didn't do much about it and most of them still owned slaves. And I still didn't see anything indicating that the 3/5ths compromise was some subtle plot by northerners to put an end to slavery. Everything I've read said it was basically a political deal to hold the union together and limit the power of the south. I'm not hating on the founding fathers... they were men of their times. That includes their greater accomplishments and their flaws. They wrote one helluva document for building a great country, and they were revolutionary in their thinking in many ways. I just think it's a bit sick to say some slavery was less bad or that the black community should just forget and forgive if we say "well hey, we were working on it... so it took almost 200 years for us to get around to getting you out from under the lash, we did it didn't we? So what are you whining about? We did you a favor bringing you here anyway."
To add to what I was saying about religion...one has to understand where the founders were coming from. Under British rule they were forced to be Protestant by the government. Anything else had to be practiced in secrecy. One cannot ignore the fact that these were God fearing men of various beliefs (and one or two athiests..if I recall correctly..). They wanted to ensure a freedom to practice all their beliefs out in public without fear of persecution. That is why the Constitution is written the way it was. They did not want the government to have the power, under any circumstance, to tell them they cannot show their religious beliefs in any way. They made sure it would be unconstitutional for the government to stop, or say no to, any display of religion, private or public, even on government property.
Exactly. Which is why state action that is religious in nature is unconstititutional... aka... your government cannot put up a nativity scene or hang the 10 commandments in a court room, because it is akin to the government in that place endorsing one religion as the officially recognized one in that community. Just like the British did with Protestantism. No, the government cannot limit the ability of private citizens like the Danbury Baptists to practice their religion openly. But that doesn't mean that the government can openly adopt or endorse their views either. The protection of free exercise is for citizens, not the government.
I appreciate your in depth post RE the founding fathers, but I'm still not convinced. There is a lot of rhetoric about the evil of slavery, but they didn't do much about it and most of them still owned slaves. And I still didn't see anything indicating that the 3/5ths compromise was some subtle plot by northerners to put an end to slavery. Everything I've read said it was basically a political deal to hold the union together and limit the power of the south. I'm not hating on the founding fathers... they were men of their times. That includes their greater accomplishments and their flaws. They wrote one helluva document for building a great country, and they were revolutionary in their thinking in many ways. I just think it's a bit sick to say some slavery was less bad or that the black community should just forget and forgive if we say "well hey, we were working on it... so it took almost 200 years for us to get around to getting you out from under the lash, we did it didn't we? So what are you whining about? We did you a favor bringing you here anyway."
The government can't, but an private citizen can. there was one group of private citizen's that wanted to put up a nativity scene..But I am concerned about the potential mojave desert ruling and other cases of that sort...
I wasn't guessing regarding the three-fifths rule. There are letters between the founder's saying it outright. I went into length about one of them that wrote about it and it's purpose (Morris).
I personally doubt catefrances meant it the way she is switching it to mean now, considering what she was responding to, but regardless, it came off sounding like if you are a slave, the treatment was equally as harsh for all, just cos you were a slave. Yes it is terrible to be owned by another human being, but it doesn't end simply at ownership.
In re to everyone else..I do have an idea of what it was like to be a slave, from the stories told me by my grandmother of my great great grandparents who were slaves in this country, and the treatment of my great grandparents. I don't know personally, of course, but I do know their insight into it. Far more valuable than some tv show or song...I am not defending any owners or their practice, I'm just stating the obvious, some weren't treated near as harsh as others. That's not to do with the actual act of being owned in itself, so no I am not excusing it. And I don't think blacks should be thankful. I just find it retarded to not celebrate our independence from Britain, and the creation of the union.
...I personally doubt catefrances meant it the way she is switching it to mean now, considering what she was responding to, but regardless, it came off sounding like if you are a slave, the treatment was equally as harsh for all, just cos you were a slave. Yes it is terrible to be owned by another human being, but it doesn't end simply at ownership....
really??? so now youre inferring that i was meaning something other than what i said??? what is it you think im switching it to mean now??? i said a slave is slave is a slave. i never deviated from that. and i will never deviate from that. i couldnt have said it any plainer. nor could i have said it any differently.
hear my name
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
comparing one form of slavery to another is like comparing rape to murder... which is worse?
Well in one case you're alive after the crime sort of and the latter you're dead for sure.
Peace
*We CAN bomb the World to pieces, but we CAN'T bomb it into PEACE*...Michael Franti
*MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
.....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti
*The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)
comparing one form of slavery to another is like comparing rape to murder... which is worse?
Well in one case you're alive after the crime sort of and the latter you're dead for sure.
Peace
Yeah I was trying to make a point there... :?
it is trivial to debate the topic. They are both fucking horrific. Both should be ridden from humanity. No reason to compare/contrast.
That's the point...
Everything not forbidden is compulsory and eveything not compulsory is forbidden. You are free... free to do what the government says you can do.
0
g under p
Surfing The far side of THE Sombrero Galaxy Posts: 18,200
I realized that and I was just bringing some light heartedness to this subject of slavery. There's a nice piece by George carlin on this subject that really puts it proper perspective. I'll try and post it later.
Peace
*We CAN bomb the World to pieces, but we CAN'T bomb it into PEACE*...Michael Franti
*MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
.....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti
*The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)
I realized that and I was just bringing some light heartedness to this subject of slavery. There's a nice piece by George carlin on this subject that really puts it proper perspective. I'll try and post it later.
Peace
Carlin on slavery? Blasphemy... I thought I'd heard all of his material and I don't recall that one.
Everything not forbidden is compulsory and eveything not compulsory is forbidden. You are free... free to do what the government says you can do.
0
g under p
Surfing The far side of THE Sombrero Galaxy Posts: 18,200
I realized that and I was just bringing some light heartedness to this subject of slavery. There's a nice piece by George carlin on this subject that really puts it proper perspective. I'll try and post it later.
Peace
Carlin on slavery? Blasphemy... I thought I'd heard all of his material and I don't recall that one.
no worries it's funny and it's the truth.
Peace
*We CAN bomb the World to pieces, but we CAN'T bomb it into PEACE*...Michael Franti
*MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
.....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti
*The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)
0
g under p
Surfing The far side of THE Sombrero Galaxy Posts: 18,200
I realized that and I was just bringing some light heartedness to this subject of slavery. There's a nice piece by George carlin on this subject that really puts it proper perspective. I'll try and post it later.
Peace
Carlin on slavery? Blasphemy... I thought I'd heard all of his material and I don't recall that one.
Here's a bit of it here @ the 5:40 mark but the whole thing is hilarious
*We CAN bomb the World to pieces, but we CAN'T bomb it into PEACE*...Michael Franti
*MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
.....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti
*The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)
Comments
please explain to me how it is incorrect to say that a slave is a slave is slave. slaves are owned as possessions. would you like to be owned?? by another human who is your equal?? youre excusing the owning of humans by other humans by saying there were differing degrees of slavery. how the fuck does that work? my perspective on slavery is of one human owning another? whats yours??
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
No. I'm simply in agreement with Cate Frances' original assessment that 'A Slave is A Slave'... and counter to your view that, while all slavery is bad... some forms of slavery are worse than others, thus tolerable, at best. That, 'well, it could be worse' outlook might work from an outsider, looking in. I have never been in position where I was not afforded freedom... so, I really can't say. All I can do is imagine what it would be like to lose my freedom.
That's all.
...
And certainly... while our founding Fathers were abolishonists, they were still owners of slaves. I don't hold this against them... and I fully believe in the Constitution they crafted. That was just the way of the world, circa 1776. But, I hold them as who and what they are and do not gloss over or rationalize their choices.
Hail, Hail!!!
please explain to me how it is incorrect to say that a slave is a slave is slave. slaves are owned as possessions. would you like to be owned?? by another human who is your equal?? youre excusing the owning of humans by other humans by saying there were differing degrees of slavery. how the fuck does that work? my perspective on slavery is of one human owning another? whats yours??[/quote]
It appears she's trying to find some justification in all this that some slaves were treated better than others and therefore that's makes that treatment ok in the eyes of an abolitionist. Maybe she should take a look at the series ROOTS.
Peace
*MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
.....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti
*The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)
i dont know what fluttergirl is trying to do and that is why im seeking clarification. im trying to understand her thinking of this matter. but right now im struggling to do so cause to me there are not degrees of slavery. either one is a slave and therefore owned by another human or one is free and the agent of their own life.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
I understand what you're saying, I tend to feel these slaves got the feeling more from the words in this song by Living Colour...Nothingness. The one good is that form of slavery didn't last forever even though we now today have other forms of slavery which doesn't make their treatment ANY better no matter who owns them.
A slave is a slave period.
Peace
*MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
.....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti
*The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)
Exactly. Which is why state action that is religious in nature is unconstititutional... aka... your government cannot put up a nativity scene or hang the 10 commandments in a court room, because it is akin to the government in that place endorsing one religion as the officially recognized one in that community. Just like the British did with Protestantism. No, the government cannot limit the ability of private citizens like the Danbury Baptists to practice their religion openly. But that doesn't mean that the government can openly adopt or endorse their views either. The protection of free exercise is for citizens, not the government.
I appreciate your in depth post RE the founding fathers, but I'm still not convinced. There is a lot of rhetoric about the evil of slavery, but they didn't do much about it and most of them still owned slaves. And I still didn't see anything indicating that the 3/5ths compromise was some subtle plot by northerners to put an end to slavery. Everything I've read said it was basically a political deal to hold the union together and limit the power of the south. I'm not hating on the founding fathers... they were men of their times. That includes their greater accomplishments and their flaws. They wrote one helluva document for building a great country, and they were revolutionary in their thinking in many ways. I just think it's a bit sick to say some slavery was less bad or that the black community should just forget and forgive if we say "well hey, we were working on it... so it took almost 200 years for us to get around to getting you out from under the lash, we did it didn't we? So what are you whining about? We did you a favor bringing you here anyway."
The government can't, but an private citizen can. there was one group of private citizen's that wanted to put up a nativity scene..But I am concerned about the potential mojave desert ruling and other cases of that sort...
I wasn't guessing regarding the three-fifths rule. There are letters between the founder's saying it outright. I went into length about one of them that wrote about it and it's purpose (Morris).
I personally doubt catefrances meant it the way she is switching it to mean now, considering what she was responding to, but regardless, it came off sounding like if you are a slave, the treatment was equally as harsh for all, just cos you were a slave. Yes it is terrible to be owned by another human being, but it doesn't end simply at ownership.
In re to everyone else..I do have an idea of what it was like to be a slave, from the stories told me by my grandmother of my great great grandparents who were slaves in this country, and the treatment of my great grandparents. I don't know personally, of course, but I do know their insight into it. Far more valuable than some tv show or song...I am not defending any owners or their practice, I'm just stating the obvious, some weren't treated near as harsh as others. That's not to do with the actual act of being owned in itself, so no I am not excusing it. And I don't think blacks should be thankful. I just find it retarded to not celebrate our independence from Britain, and the creation of the union.
really??? so now youre inferring that i was meaning something other than what i said??? what is it you think im switching it to mean now??? i said a slave is slave is a slave. i never deviated from that. and i will never deviate from that. i couldnt have said it any plainer. nor could i have said it any differently.
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Peace
*MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
.....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti
*The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)
Yeah I was trying to make a point there... :?
it is trivial to debate the topic. They are both fucking horrific. Both should be ridden from humanity. No reason to compare/contrast.
That's the point...
Peace
*MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
.....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti
*The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)
Carlin on slavery? Blasphemy... I thought I'd heard all of his material and I don't recall that one.
no worries it's funny and it's the truth.
Peace
*MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
.....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti
*The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)
Here's a bit of it here @ the 5:40 mark but the whole thing is hilarious
George Carlin....American Double Standard
Peace
*MUSIC IS the expression of EMOTION.....and that POLITICS IS merely the DECOY of PERCEPTION*
.....song_Music & Politics....Michael Franti
*The scientists of today think deeply instead of clearly. One must be sane to think clearly, but one can think deeply and be quite INSANE*....Nikola Tesla(a man who shaped our world of electricity with his futuristic inventions)