Which Religion's Slavers Were Better?

[Ben Kenobi]

I don't doubt you have a history degree, getting a degree is not particularly difficult. The fact that you have a degree and yet completely ignore everything it taught you however, instead twisting facts to fit your stupid religious obsession is what I have an issue with. Well that and your compulsive dishonesty. It's actually a shame because if you weren't such a lying douche, you might actually be fun to debate with.

Thank you. That's all I was after, Kentonio

I actually like the back and forth sparring.

[kentonio]

Thank you. That's all I was after, Kentonio

I actually like the back and forth sparring.

Stay honest, and we'd do a lot more of it.

[Ellestar]

Then why didn't another culture actually free the slaves? Since, as we all know, slavery is a purely Christian phenomenon.

Ottoman Empire, Islam, were slavers. Mongol Empire, Tengri, were slavers. Last time i heard, the don't have a slavery anymore. Is it some sort of magic that made their slaves and slavers disappear?

[Dinner]

At least the children of Roman slaves were free.

[Dauphin]

Ottoman Empire, Islam, were slavers. Mongol Empire, Tengri, were slavers. Last time i heard, the don't have a slavery anymore. Is it some sort of magic that made their slaves and slavers disappear?

You may wish to rephrase. Those empires don't have much of anything, seeing as they don't exist anymore.

[Lorizael]

Ah, here it is! You were right, Jon.

[Dinner]

The Islamic slave trade in Africans transported around 25 times more black Africans than the entire history of the transatlantic slave trade. The Muslims also castrated all black males to prevent them from breeding and literally worked virtually all of them to death. Those numbers don't include the millions who died being forced to walk across the Sahara.

[Dinner]

I wonder what Ben is up to these days?

[Lorizael]

I don't care.

x-post, but it works either way

[Geronimo]

**** you, BK. Just **** you. **** you for being completely unable to stay on topic and derailing the thread with your bigoted bull**** and trolling others into responding to your tired old **** with the same goddamn arguments we've been having with you for over a decade. You are such a terrible piece of **** whose only function on this site is to destroy conversation and discussion. What an awful, slimy, filthy piece of crap you are. Can't you have the goddamn decency to shut the **** up and keep your awful beliefs to yourself?

ok. Why is your response justified by any of the apologist anti-islam posting here or your earlier thread? You apparently want honest discussion about the history and application of people's sincerely, even fervently held religious beliefs but you seem to feel entitled to get all huffy when some of those believers get all defensive and apologetic and try to draw comparisons to other belief systems in the same context? Your reaction here is like what I'd expect to someone admitting in the forum that they had slept with your spouse or poisoned your dog or something.

[Lorizael]

lol i am not relitigating an argument from 8 years ago. i was not asking about islam. i was not bashing christianity. i was trying to understand what seemed to me to be a weird, unexpected sociological phenomenon. but let's not pretend that was everyone's first interaction with BK, who was long a poisonous presence on this forum, masking his bigotry and hatefulness behind a mostly polite facade.

[Geronimo]

"hatefulness" and "hate" in general is an accusation tossed about far too frequently IMHO. The assumption seems to be that all expressions of bias against a protected class can meaningfully be equated to "hate". I certainly agree that there's really no room for bias against any protected class or any equivalent that might be identified. We should stand or fall as individuals and broad generalizations are and have been very damaging to the individuals directly involved and to the societies they live in. I think the distinction between garden variety bias and true hatred is important because when true hate is part of the motivation for these biases it is much more difficult to reform and tends to be far more damaging.

How could you tell that "hate" was part of BK's obvious harmful bias and generalizations? How do you tell for anyone in general?

[Lorizael]

How could you tell that "hate" was part of BK's obvious harmful bias and generalizations?

20 years of observation

[Geronimo]

I'm not seeing it in this thread. this is important. did Ben actually have some kind of smoking gun posts that left hatred on Ben's part as the only reasonable explanation for their contents?

[Lorizael]

I am not interested in "proving" to you that I know what was in his heart of hearts. If you didn't reach the same conclusion (that many others also did) over the same timespan, /me shrugs, oh well, I guess we had different perspectives. I have and have had friends with very different political views from mine, sometimes even views I thought could be potentially harmful, but I have never been inclined to ascribe "hatefulness" to their beliefs. If I thought that was an appropriate characterization, I would not maintain such a friendship. It is not a conclusion I reach lightly.