• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Most Americans in Abraham Lincoln's day were Christians. (Christians who didnt own slaves.) Prove me wrong.

Here’s what my state, Texas, had to say when they joined the Confederacy. It’s not very different from what the other rebellious states said.

From: A Declaration of the Causes which Impel the State of Texas to Secede from the Federal Union.

February 2nd, 1861
.
.
.

We hold as undeniable truths that the governments of the various States, and of the confederacy itself, were established exclusively by the white race, for themselves and their posterity; that the African race had no agency in their establishment; that they were rightfully held and regarded as an inferior and dependent race, and in that condition only could their existence in this country be rendered beneficial or tolerable.

That in this free government *all white men are and of right ought to be entitled to equal civil and political rights* [emphasis in the original]; that the servitude of the African race, as existing in these States, is mutually beneficial to both bond and free, and is abundantly authorized and justified by the experience of mankind, and the revealed will of the Almighty Creator, as recognized by all Christian nations; while the destruction of the existing relations between the two races, as advocated by our sectional enemies, would bring inevitable calamities upon both and desolation upon the fifteen slave-holding states.

[my bolding]
 
I thought that everyone knew that almost all slave holders were Christians.

Yes. I already said that.

"Most Americans in Abraham Lincoln's day were Christians. (Christians who didnt own slaves.)"

The argument is about why the majority of Christians didn't support the institution which slave owners claimed was supposedly a Christian thing to do - denying the worker his wage, wringing your bread from the sweat of another man's brow.

441513-Abraham-Lincoln-Quote-There-is-no-greater-injustice-than-to-wring.jpg
 
I thought that everyone knew that almost all slave holders were Christians.

Yes. I already said that.

"Most Americans in Abraham Lincoln's day were Christians. (Christians who didnt own slaves.)"

The argument is about why the majority of Christians didn't support the institution which slave owners claimed was supposedly a Christian thing to do - denying the worker his wage, wringing your bread from the sweat of another man's brow.

441513-Abraham-Lincoln-Quote-There-is-no-greater-injustice-than-to-wring.jpg
And where did you get the idea that the majority of Christians did not support slavery? Cite, please. Certainly in the south, support of slavery among Christians as well-night universal, as cites have given that you have ignored. In the north it’s a little more complicated.
 

All in all, it seems to me that denying Christian conscience in the ending of US/UK slavery is desperate clutching at straws.
Except no one is denying this.

Yes. Right here in this thread its being denied.

What is being denied is your implied argument that there was a univocal Christian opposition to slavery

Show me where I have said there was univocal Christian opposition to slavery.

...when clearly there was not.

Of course it's clear. Read the title of the thread.

But thanks for another stupid strawman.

Says the person who can't find me ever saying there was "univocal Christian opposition to slavery"
 
Also, your “wring your profits,” etc., was from Lincoln, not a Christian. Also, being a great writer, he colorfully used the word “bread” as a metonym for “profits.” Why did you even bring that up? Even if Lincoln were a Christian, and he wasn’t, it does not follow that his quote represented majority opinion among Christians or anyone else. Why are you always so evasive and slippery and disingenuous? Never mind, I know. It’s a rhetorical question.
 
The argument is about why the majority of Christians didn't support the institution which slave owners claimed was supposedly a Christian thing to do -
What makes you think that a majority of US Christian people cared about slavery and racism?
I don't think so.

I'm confident that it was the secularists who were opposed to that moral and ethical horror who got rid of it. Sorta.

It took a long time to get rid of the Christian morality and ethics.
And it hasn't happened entirely yet.
Tom
 
The argument is about why the majority of Christians didn't support the institution which slave owners claimed was supposedly a Christian thing to do - denying the worker his wage, wringing your bread from the sweat of another man's brow.
Because slavery is unconscionable, obviously. Even if the Bible says otherwise.
 

All in all, it seems to me that denying Christian conscience in the ending of US/UK slavery is desperate clutching at straws.
Except no one is denying this.

Yes. Right here in this thread its being denied.

Where? No one disputes that there was plenty of Christian sentiment against slavery, although, of course, since virtually everyone in the U.S. at the time was Christian, or at least professed to be, that means very little.
What is being denied is your implied argument that there was a univocal Christian opposition to slavery

Show me where I have said there was univocal Christian opposition to slavery.

You’ve strongly implied it. If that is not your claim, then what is? What point are you trying to make? Do you even know?
...when clearly there was not.

Of course it's clear. Read the title of the thread.

The title of the thread is stupid, as I’ve pointed out. But since you’ve truncated my original quote with ellipses, I don’t know precisely what you are referring to here, and can’t be arsed to scroll up and look.
But thanks for another stupid strawman.

Says the person who can't find me ever saying there was "univocal Christian opposition to slavery"

As noted, you have strongly IMPLIED it. Again, if that is not your argument, then what is? What point are you trying to make in your usual disingenuous way?
 
where did you get the idea that the majority of Christians did not support slavery?

From that handy little device we call democracy.
We’ve already been over this. The U.S. is a Republic, not a democracy. There was never a vote of the people to abolish slavery. Had there been such vote whether to abolish it, it would have failed. Slavery was abolished by force of arms. Educate yourself for a change instead of frantically spitting out slices of baloney like an automated baloney-slicing machine run amok.
 
The argument is about why the majority of Christians didn't support the institution which slave owners claimed was supposedly a Christian thing to do - denying the worker his wage, wringing your bread from the sweat of another man's brow.
Because slavery is unconscionable, obviously.

Slavery is unconscionable except when its the lesser of two evils.

Even if the Bible says otherwise.

It doesn't.
 
No one disputes that there was plenty of Christian sentiment against slavery,
Maybe.
If so I don't know about it.

People who identified as Christian, but held secular values and ethics, were plentiful.

They were also considered false Christians by the Bible Believers, because their morals and ethics could not be supported by Scripture.
Tom
 
where did you get the idea that the majority of Christians did not support slavery?

From that handy little device we call democracy.
We’ve already been over this. The U.S. is a Republic, not a democracy. There was never a vote of the people to abolish slavery.

From Wikipedia. (AKA Common knowledge)

The Thirteenth Amendment (Amendment XIII) to the United States Constitution abolished slavery and involuntary servitude, except as punishment for a crime. The amendment was passed by the Senate on April 8, 1864, by the House of Representatives on January 31, 1865, and ratified by the required 27 of the then 36 states on December 6, 1865.

Had there been such vote whether to abolish it, it would have failed. Slavery was abolished by force of arms.

Yes. Thats what happens when democracy needs to be enforced.

Educate yourself for a change...

No. I'm too busy educating you.
 
No one disputes that there was plenty of Christian sentiment against slavery,
Maybe.
If so I don't know about it.

People who identified as Christian, but held secular values and ethics, were plentiful.

They were also considered false Christians by the Bible Believers, because their morals and ethics could not be supported by Scripture.
Tom

Well, that’s fair enough, the No True Christian thing and all that. But a lot of the abolitionists in the North certainly self-identified as Christians, and did not think of their values as secular. But all of this stuff is largely irrelevant anyway, since the vast majority of Americans identified as Christians back then, and as we can see, they were all over the map on their opinions on slavery and much else besides, demonstrating yet again how a supposed Holy Book dictated by Santa in the Sky isn’t clear enough on its meaning to attract unanimous agreement on what that meaning is. I guess Santa is an incompetent writer.
 
I should amend a little what I just said. “Secular” became a scare word as propagandized by the odious Newt Gingrich. He turned it into a synonym for atheist. In reality, it means one who believes in the separation of church and state, and arguably most Christians back then accepted the separation.
 
where did you get the idea that the majority of Christians did not support slavery?

From that handy little device we call democracy.
We’ve already been over this. The U.S. is a Republic, not a democracy. There was never a vote of the people to abolish slavery.

From Wikipedia. (AKA Common knowledge)

The Thirteenth Amendment (Amendment XIII) to the United States Constitution abolished slavery and involuntary servitude, except as punishment for a crime. The amendment was passed by the Senate on April 8, 1864, by the House of Representatives on January 31, 1865, and ratified by the required 27 of the then 36 states on December 6, 1865.

Are you really this dense or it just your usual disingenuousness? The above AGREES with what I wrote and you quoted! The amendment was never passed by a direct vote of the people — my point exactly. Try to stop making yourself look foolish..
Had there been such vote whether to abolish it, it would have failed. Slavery was abolished by force of arms.

Yes. Thats what happens when democracy needs to be enforced.

Except the original aim of the war was not to end slavery, but to preserve the Union. Can you really not know this? In fact, in a famous public statement, Lincoln felt impelled to address the qualms of Union soldiers who did want to fight to free slaves after the Emancipation Proclamation. Do I have to post a link for you?
Educate yourself for a change...

No. I'm too busy educating you.

Your educational deficits are glaring. You know nothing of this period in history. I have studied it extensively.
 
I find it hard to believe you are so lacking in knowledge as to confuse a vote by the House and Senate with a direct vote of the people.
 
You see, this is what it means to say that the U.S. is a republic, and not a democracy. Try to work that out for yourself, if you can.
 
Slavery would not exist today for the simple fact it was uneconomical.
Slavery does exist today.

But (as was the case in the Confederacy), it is mostly confined to labour that cannot be done more cheaply and effectively by machine, so it is far rarer today than it used to be.

The big reason that the North were less keen on slavery than the South was that the North was industrial, and the South agricultural, in an era before mechanised farming.

Field work in cotton, tobacco, and sugar plantations was so unpleasant that nobody would do it voluntarily for wages lower than the value of the product; These commodities were only able to be produced at all by forcing people to do the work. No incentive was sufficient to get European workers to voluntariliy emigrate to the plantations in the colonies in anything close to sufficient numbers; So the Europeans resolved this by shipping Africans (and European criminals) to the colonies against their will.

There's a reason why abolition and the industrial revolution happened at about the same time; And why the places that were first to industrialize were the first to push for abolition.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom