Are All Slaveowners Equal?

[JIMINZ]

Are you being serious?

Sure I am are you?

 

[JIMINZ]

Were really in trouble if this is the way Christians think as as well. But you are entitled to your own views I understand.

No need to get huffy.

If I am entitled to my opinion why does that opinion bother you, because it doesn't coincide with yours, that is why it's a difference of opinion.

 

[JIMINZ]

Are you being serious?

Just two.

Were George Washington and Thomas Jefferson, Racists, Bigots, Haters of Black people, or was it a way of life and of the time, when machinery was not available?

Read some history not just dates and places.

 

[GenemZ]

The more I read the more ridiculous these comments are by loving Christians.

You did not address anything I said directly. So, what you said can be either for what I said, or against...

 

[Archivist]

Were really in trouble if this is the way Christians think as as well. But you are entitled to your own views I understand.

But it was the way things were in that era. It was the Quakers who were the first to turn against slavery in the early to mid-1700s but prior to that it was common practice. Even Quaker William Penn owned slaves, although he freed them in his will. He died before the Quakers started turning against it.

 

[Rugged Cross]

We have seen statues of numerous Confederate leaders come down. More recently statues honoring slaveowners who predated the Civil War have been removed.

But, are all slaveowners created equal? I would first note that at one point in his life Benjamin Franklin owned two slaves. Turning against slavery, Franklin eventually freed them. He went on to become the president of an abolitionist organization. Likewise James Wilson owned one slave who he freed. He thereafter worked against slavery, a practice that he believed would die out. James Buchanan actually purchased two slaves in Virginia who he took to Pennsylvania and freed. Yes, there was a political reason for this--he didn't want to run for office with a slaveowner in the family--but he still freed two slaves.

Should these men be placed in the same category as those who owned but never freed their slaves? I don’t think so--I think their statues should stay up (assuming there are statues of Wilson)--but I’m eager to hear what others think.

Benjamin Franklin . Citizen Ben . Abolitionist | PBS

Slavery is vile, and still goes on today, though people are only attacking historical slavery. If we remove or destroy these statues we are hiding the sin, sweeping the dust under the carpet so to speak. But they still happened, instead of destruction they could be for edification. We are supposed to learn from history not destroy it. With this mentality, do we start removing characters or passages from the Bible because they had slaves, servants (who at times were treated like slaves), where does it stop and what will the next cleansing be? Pets, after all we did not get their permission to be our pets.

 

[GenemZ]

But it was the way things were in that era. It was the Quakers who were the first to turn against slavery in the early to mid-1700s but prior to that it was common practice. Even Quaker William Penn owned slaves, although he freed them in his will. He died before the Quakers started turning against it.

The reason England stopped having slaves? Was because of a British member of the House of Commons, Granville Sharp. Granville Sharp was a Bible and Greek scholar. He established a principle of understanding a grammatical principle of Greek syntax, which we now call the Granville Sharp rule. He was the one who introduced to England the need to end slavery while in the house of commons. He gave many speeches.

In spite of what the liberal elitists would have us believe, the freeing of modern day slaves did not begin with human-good unbelievers.

And, for the black Americans? Their baptism into self respect began within the Word of God they learned in Church.. Not from liberal secularism that tries to compete with God in a superficial, hypocritical, way.

 

[GenemZ]

The more I read the more ridiculous these comments are by loving Christians.

Was God a lover of the Jews in the wilderness of the Exodus?

 

[Christian Sonic Fan]

My family owned slaves. I can't undo what they did nor do I see it as morally reprehensible, despite the times that we live in which calls for such statements due to peer pressure (but I honestly don't care. Call me racist...oh gee...ahh!..... The big scary words!... Yawn..) We are reminded that in the 1780's and 1800's when my family had these slaves that it was considered normal. I see it as what it is. You know what I said when I found this out? "Cool. What else did my family do?" Turns out, one my my family members started a Primitive Baptist church in Ohio and another one started the Dutch East India Trading Company.

 

[Loversofjesus_2018]

Just two.

Were George Washington and Thomas Jefferson, Racists, Bigots, Haters of Black people, or was it a way of life and of the time, when machinery was not available?

Read some history not just dates and places.

So because it was a way of life then that makes it ok? To ENSLAVE people? Again yes I’m bothered by the opinion but I’m working on that. I’m better than I was before but yes when I see people justifying slavery or acting nonchalant about it it gets to me.

 

[JIMINZ]

So because it was a way of life then that makes it ok? To ENSLAVE people? Again yes I’m bothered by the opinion but I’m working on that. I’m better than I was before but yes when I see people justifying slavery or acting nonchalant about it it gets to me.

No it's called understanding History and not judging everyone and everything that happened in the past with today's standards, it's like saying we as a Country have not grown or moved since 1776, how about accepting what was then because that was then with their understanding then growing from that knowledge, but you don't seem to be able to do that.

 

[Loversofjesus_2018]

No it's called understanding History and not judging everyone and everything that happened in the past with today's standards, it's like saying we as a Country have not grown or moved since 1776, how about accepting what was then because that was then with their understanding then growing from that knowledge, but you don't seem to be able to do that.

I understand completely that was how they operated. I also understand that there was a time where black people were considered 3/5ths a man. I understand that woman were considered property and initially that’s why a ring was given hence the reason why men didn’t wear them in the beginning. I bring all that up only to say I get that society functioned in a certain way and I understand. But it doesn’t make it ok. I hope I’m not being judgmental when I say that one human being does not have a right to treat other human beings however they choose just because they feel they are superior. But you do not feel the same and as you mentioned why should I be bothered by this fact? And you are right. My apologies for letting your opinion bother me. I should know better than that by now. Hope you have a good day