Is Owning A Slave Really That Bad?

Well, you consider that don't be free is correct? That your master owns your life? You anymore owns your own life.

Would you become a slave? Have you thought the consequences of that?

No, that's slavery.

 

white people thought owning slavers was the right thing to do

 

Okay, self-imposed slavery, "ideological slavery" and all of this BS is completely different than physically enslaving people and passing legislation that they are property and sub-human. Come on, use some common sense here.

 

Who is saying that a slave wouldn't own their life? That might be true if they were treated poorly, but if they were treated well, and respected, then they wouldn't really have a right to complain, would they?

 

More like serfdom. Priviledges can be denied to soldiers, too, and you won't call soldiers slaves, or would you?

 

If they have rights to be treated well, they are not really slaves. If they have no rights, how do you assure them to be treated well? Owners can change their minds and owners can change, too.

 

Who says slaves cannot be treated well? You may own them, but that doesn't mean you should treat them as sub-human.

 

So did black people since they sold your people to white people.

 

How did it work in reality? Why should a slave owner treat them well? This would mean less profit for him.

 

We are assuming the slave owner cares about profit. There could be good slave owners. If the owner was bad to his slaves then slavery would never be allowed again, would it? But if they treated them well then perhaps again it may be legal.

 

Why should a good guy want to have slaves? If he wants to treat people well, he can hire people. They can buy their food themselves then.

An au pair girl or a butler are not slaves. What advantage does it have to be a slave owner?

 

My thoughts exactly Volker.

 

This could only be answered depending on ones beliefs.

Owning a slave goes against the morals of Christianity so yes it is wrong.

Although to Atheists it could be seen as rational since slaves can provide a number of benefits to the owner.

 

I agree with you Makedde....can I be your slave??

 

Slavery was the method society used to use for welfare. Instead of handing money to people who were capable but too lazy to work, those people were enslaved and their survival needs were provided in exchange for forced labor. This helped society to get some productivity out of a class of people who wouldn't otherwise work.

Kidnapped slaves started becoming popular because welfare-class slaves were not prevalent enough to meet demand and were shown to be less productive than kidnapped slaves.

Nonetheless slavery, or at least the option of servitude or starvation, were an interesting method of combating poverty without government free-money giveaways that we use today.

 

That's fundamental to the definition of slavery and the key point you're missing. Talking about how slaves could be treated well is irrelevant when they could equally be treated poorly. You might as well say we don't need human rights law because our governments treat us fairly well.

More significantly, they could be treated in a manner you consider perfectly reasonable but they don't. The key point of slavery is that, in that situation, they have no power. You own them and so they can't decide they wish to end the arrangement. Similarly, if you're treating them fairly well but someone else offers to treat them even better, they can't take up the better offer. If you want to sell them to someone who won't treat them as well, they can do nothing to stop it.

 

You really have got to be kidding me. People are not property. With the exception of your minor children you have no possible excuse for any idea of ownership of any individual. Do you personally have an enslavement fetish?
If this is serious, I would ask that you seek counseling.

 

agreed this may be a sexualized fetish more than a serious question.

 

Welfare is socialism slavery is capitalism.

 

Ahh yes the free market is slavery...

 

Did you even read my OP? Tell me where the problem is - and would you rather have people in employment or leeching off the taxpayer?

 

sure they are!

government offices call them..... "human resources"

you are already PWNED!

that birth certificate was your ticket to freedom englannd style!

just like the 14th amendment they take the shackles off your feet hand you a pen and you become free whan you swear allegiance to lord, or in this case the united states. LOL

its right out of th elaw dictionaries!

that freeedome but I bet they forgot to tell ya huh?

you are free when you are franchised, the birth certificate did that.

made you a member under the sovereign state just like serfdom made you a member under the sovereign king!

and Subject subject SUBJECT SUBject subJECT sUbJeCt to the jurrisdiction thereof! LOL

yeeha!

rockin!

 

So you want to be a slave to a guy? That avatar is just an Australian singer that Mak likes. Look at his profile photo by clicking on his name.

 

So explain why you would prefer someone to be leeching off the taxpayer than to be employed?

*cough* I'm a girl.

 

Slaves cannot be treated well by definition. They must believe they have no choice but to obey ,and that can only be achieved by brute force. Otherwise they are not slaves.