Considering people as property isn't mistreatment?
10/27/2005 8:16:24 PM
The point is that he condoned slavery at all!
10/27/2005 8:42:36 PM
So it's not ok to be cruel BUT it's ok to punish him so that he dies, as long as he lives for day or two after the punishment?
Neat. I suppose this doesn't count as mistreating them.
12/13/2005 2:42:04 PM
Clearly, you don't even comprehend what you're saying; I can only assume you're so mindlessly confident in the righteousness of your dogma that you'll regurgitate any assertion it makes that appears, upon cursory inspection, relevant to the subject of discussion in the full expectancy that it will support your position without even bothering to properly read it and see what it actually fucking says.
That a slave should always be reverent to a master, good or bad, explicitly and specifically allows for the possibility of there being bad masters and, both without any direct condemnation and forbidding condemnation on the part of the slave, implicitly accepts and condones them. This can only mean that your god not only approves of slavery in general, a concept abbhorent in itself, but at minimum both accepts and supports cruelty towards slaves even in excess of the inherent abusiveness of treating a human being like property.
4/26/2009 7:17:22 AM
Thinking it's ok to "own" other people is not ok, not at all. So how he thinks you should treat slaves is of no interest, as there should be no slaves, to treat or mistreat.
You, on the other hand, should not mistreat the period mark. One in the end of each sentense is sufficient. If you want to hint that the sentence is not really finished, then you can use three. But only rarely, not in each and every sentence.
4/26/2009 7:42:10 AM