Slavery and reparations

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
"in Africa doing their voodoo or whatever ". Lol. The stupidity of some American bible bashers still astounds me
 
If we gonna pay ''reparations''' how do we make sure we are not paying the African/black Warlords that sold us the slaves at the time?
Secondly if we are paying these reparations why stop there? Slavery has been part of history since before Jesus christ so if we just lookup everyone who might/possibly/could be etc. has been victim of slavery we bankrupt the world economy but we have an cleanish concience...
 

Rusty Nails

Country Member
It is not confined to those weird evangelists in the US. I used to work with a woman, an elderly, very devout Christian; in her day to day activities a lovely, very caring and helpful person. In a chat with her one day I mentioned that I was not a believer in any religion and she was very upset for me. Even though she thought I was a nice bloke she said that if I didn't believe I was doomed to Hell, even if I had come from an environment/country that had never heard of or practiced Christianity (which I don't).

I have a cousin who is a preacher in a small evangelist church and I couldn't believe the rubbish he came out with when he spoke at the funeral of his mother six months ago. Other than the subject matter he was just like the preacher in that video.
 

Ian H

Guru
If we gonna pay ''reparations''' how do we make sure we are not paying the African/black Warlords that sold us the slaves at the time?
Secondly if we are paying these reparations why stop there? Slavery has been part of history since before Jesus christ so if we just lookup everyone who might/possibly/could be etc. has been victim of slavery we bankrupt the world economy but we have an cleanish concience...

The usual whataboutery ignoring the industrial scale and cruelty of the European slave trade.
In at least one instance where Africans refused to trade, the British ransacked the village, destroying houses and killing people.

Diagram of a slave ship (British Library)
 
The usual whataboutery ignoring the industrial scale and cruelty of the European slave trade.
In at least one instance where Africans refused to trade, the British ransacked the village, destroying houses and killing people.

Diagram of a slave ship (British Library)
Whataboutery is a very bad argument considering slavery in europe was common long(even before Jesus Christ) before we send ships to trade slaves with black warlords, if were going to pay out what is an good argument to leave our own people with slave heritage out? or is that not ''industrial'' enough to your liking? speaking of which what are your criteria for industrial slave trade?

You also failed to answer the question how we are going to prevent the family from black warlord from getting paid(again)?
 
See the link I gave you
So i was asking to explain how that is any better then below:

From before Roman times, slavery was prevalent in Britain, with indigenous Britons being routinely exported.[18][19] Following the Roman conquest of Britain, slavery was expanded and industrialised.[20]

After the fall of Roman Britain, both the Angles and Saxons propagated the slave system.[21] One of the earliest accounts of slaves from early medieval Britain come from the description of fair-haired boys from York seen in Rome by Pope Gregory the Great, in a biography written by an anonymous monk.[22]

Vikings traded with Gaelic, Pict, Brythonic and Saxon kingdoms in between raiding them for slaves.[23] Saxon slave traders sometimes worked in league with Norse traders, often selling Britons to the Irish.[24] In 870, Vikings besieged and captured the stronghold of Alt Clut (the capital of the Kingdom of Strathclyde) and in 871 most of the site's inhabitants were taken, most probably by Olaf the White and Ivar the Boneless, to the Dublin slave markets.[23] Maredudd ab Owain (d. 999) is said to have paid a large ransom for the return of 2,000 Welsh slaves
(source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_Britain
And if there is not difference why do we are considering to pay reparations to people of african heritage but not to either or own or other family of victims of slavery in europe. it just doesn't seem fair now does it?


What on earth are you on about? The black warlord is your invention.
Really? i didn't wrote below:
Many nations such as the Bono State, Ashanti of present-day Ghana and the Yoruba of present-day Nigeria were involved in slave-trading. Groups such as the Imbangala of Angola and the Nyamwezi of Tanzania would serve as intermediaries or roving bands, waging war on African states to capture people for export as slaves. source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_Africa
A bit further down that same article ''around 90% were enslaved by fellow Africans who sold them to European traders.'' in other words warlords.

Can you now answer the questions why we should only pay black family of victims of slave trade? And secondly if we would pay how would we make sure we don't pay the slave trading warlords (more likely their family) you one post ago claimed didn't exists?
 

BoldonLad

Old man on a bike. Not a member of a clique.
Location
South Tyneside
So i was asking to explain how that is any better then below:

From before Roman times, slavery was prevalent in Britain, with indigenous Britons being routinely exported.[18][19] Following the Roman conquest of Britain, slavery was expanded and industrialised.[20]

After the fall of Roman Britain, both the Angles and Saxons propagated the slave system.[21] One of the earliest accounts of slaves from early medieval Britain come from the description of fair-haired boys from York seen in Rome by Pope Gregory the Great, in a biography written by an anonymous monk.[22]

Vikings traded with Gaelic, Pict, Brythonic and Saxon kingdoms in between raiding them for slaves.[23] Saxon slave traders sometimes worked in league with Norse traders, often selling Britons to the Irish.[24] In 870, Vikings besieged and captured the stronghold of Alt Clut (the capital of the Kingdom of Strathclyde) and in 871 most of the site's inhabitants were taken, most probably by Olaf the White and Ivar the Boneless, to the Dublin slave markets.[23] Maredudd ab Owain (d. 999) is said to have paid a large ransom for the return of 2,000 Welsh slaves

(source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_Britain
And if there is not difference why do we are considering to pay reparations to people of african heritage but not to either or own or other family of victims of slavery in europe. it just doesn't seem fair now does it?



Really? i didn't wrote below:
Many nations such as the Bono State, Ashanti of present-day Ghana and the Yoruba of present-day Nigeria were involved in slave-trading. Groups such as the Imbangala of Angola and the Nyamwezi of Tanzania would serve as intermediaries or roving bands, waging war on African states to capture people for export as slaves. source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_Africa
A bit further down that same article ''around 90% were enslaved by fellow Africans who sold them to European traders.'' in other words warlords.

Can you now answer the questions why we should only pay black family of victims of slave trade? And secondly if we would pay how would we make sure we don't pay the slave trading warlords (more likely their family) you one post ago claimed didn't exists?

Oh. dear, were the Vatican at it even that long ago?
 

Unkraut

Master of the Inane Comment
Location
Germany
The stupidity of some American bible bashers still astounds me

That may sometimes be true, but modern secularists are frequently not in much of a position to criticise ...

I saw no justification of slavery here, but rather the concept that God takes the moral wickedness of men and uses it to bring about good for those who are called according to his purpose. The preacher explicitly denied he was justifying slavery.
 
Top Bottom