Who Killed Slavery?

Mo Rocca has appeared on a bunch of shows, including 'The Daily Show,' 'I Love the 80s,'...

Mo Rocca Feed

Posted Jan 10th 2008 9:00PM by Dinesh D'Souza
Filed under: Christianity, History, Controversy, Atheism

Isn't it remarkable that atheists, who did virtually nothing to oppose slavery, condemn Christians, who are the ones who abolished it?

Consider atheist Sam Harris, who blames Christianity for supporting slavery. Harris is right that slavery existed among the Old Testament Jews, and Paul even instructs slaves to obey their masters. During the civil war both sides quoted the Bible. We know all this. (Yawn, yawn.)

But slavery pre-dated Christianity by centuries and even millennia. As we read from sociologist Orlando Patterson's work, all known cultures had slavery. For centuries, slavery needed no defenders because it had no critics. Atheists who champion ancient Greece and pre-Christian Rome somehow seem to forget that those empires were based on large-scale enslavement.

Atheist Michael Shermer says Christians are "late comers" to the movement against slavery. But if this is true, who were the early comers? There weren't any. Shermer probably thinks the Christians only got around to opposing slavery in the modern era.

Wrong. Slavery was mostly eradicated from Western civilization--then called Christendom--between the fourth and the tenth century. The Greco-Roman institution of slavery gave way to serfdom. Now serfdom has its problems but at least the serf is not a "human tool" and cannot be bought and sold like property. So slavery was ended twice in Western civilization, first in the medieval era and then again in the modern era.

In the American South, Christianity proved to be the solace of the oppressed. As historian Eugene Genovese documents in Roll, Jordan, Roll, when black slaves sought to find dignity during the dark night of slavery, they didn't turn to Marcus Aurelius or David Hume; they turned to the Bible. When they sought hope and inspiration for liberation, they found it not in Voltaire or D'Holbach but in the Book of Exodus.

The anti-slavery movements led by Wilberforce in England and abolitionists in America were dominated by Christians. These believers reasoned that since we are all created equal in the eyes of God, no one has the right to rule another without consent. This is the moral basis not only of anti-slavery but also of democracy.

Jefferson was in some ways the least orthodox and the most skeptical of the founders. Yet when he condemned slavery he found himself using biblical language. In Notes on the State of Virginia Jefferson warned that those who would enslave people should reflect that "the Almighty has no attribute which can take side with us in such a contest." Jefferson famously added, "And can the liberties of a nation be thought secure when we have removed their only firm basis, a conviction in the minds of the people that these liberties are the gift of God? That they are not to be violated but with His wrath? Indeed I tremble for my country when I reflect that God is just: that His justice cannot sleep for ever."

But wasn't Jefferson also a man of science? Yes he was, and it was on the basis of the latest science of his day that Jefferson expressed his convictions about black inferiority. Citing the discoveries of modern science, Jefferson noted that "there are varieties in the race of man, distinguished by their powers both of body and of mind...as I see to be the case with races of other animals." Blacks, Jefferson continued, lack the powers of reason that are evident in whites and even in native Indians. While atheists today like to portray themselves as paragons of equal dignity, Jefferson's scientific and skeptical outlook contributed not to his anti-slavery sentiments but to his racism. Somehow Harris and Shermer neglect to point this out.

In the end the fact remains that the only movements that opposed slavery in principle were mobilized in the West, and they were overwhelmingly led and populated by Christians. Sadly the West had to use force to stop slavery in other cultures, such as the Muslim slave trade off the coast of Africa. In some quarters the campaign to eradicate slavery still goes on.

So who killed slavery? The Christians did, while everyone else generally stood by and watched.

Permalink
Email this
Linking Blogs
Comments [613]
Share this
- Add this post to...
- Netscape
- Digg
- Del.icio.us

Reader Comments ( Page 40 of 41)

Previous 15 Comments | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | Most Recent | Next 15 Comments

586. True,GHB.But there were Christians who stood up against Adolf hitler.Examples include Martin Niemoller,Dietrich Bonhoffer,and Sophie Scholl.Unfortunately,many Christians did join Hitler in his murdersome game.And Adolf is a good liar.Example,he stated in 1939 that Germany has no intention of invading other countries.Few days later,he was planning to invade Poland.

GHB,you make an important point.Christians are most of the time not good advertsments for Christianity.Look at the Facist-Christian organisations in most Axis nations.For me,however,while i acknowledge Christianity,and Christians dirty deeds,I am a Christian because i realised i am a bad guy,and i needed help.For me,christianity is all about following Christ's example.IT is about forgiving your enemies,loving those you are supposed to hate,caring for the weak,in short doing good.Yes,i have not been a perfect example of allthis,and so have many other Christians,as history shows.But the difference between good christians and bad christians is just simply allowing God to open your eyes to evil.And that is the mistake some Christians made,but thank God for the Bonhoffers,and the rest who followed Christ,instead of men.

aniekan thomas at 2:33PM on Jan 14th 2008

587. If on the other hand, one classifies Christianity as any view which is derived from the Christian story, no matter how faithful or how perverted--however logical or illogical (or pathological), then Hitler did consider himself an admirer of Jesus (perverted though his view was), although the religion we popularly call Christianity disgusted him.
--------------------------------------
YES! That is what we claim! It's the only index we have to tell you from the other people. If you SAY that you're a christian, and you TALK about Christ and scripture, and you give every indication of THINKING that you're a christian, then you're a CHRISTIAN to all of us, since we do not have Christ-O-Meters. It's the only practical definition. You don't get to exclude self=-professed christians from being "real christians" just because they SINNED!!! All christians SIN, according to YOUR GOD in YOUR BIBLE! HItler may not have been YOUR IDEA of a christian, but so what? Neither is a catholic to a protestant. Neither is a baptist to an episcopalian. You guys are the ones that are confused here!

So, all that information posted, and in the first few paragraphs it admits that we're right about Hitler, since that IS INDEED how we MUST define christians, thereby making the rest of the loooooooooong post completely superfluous. Thank you.

Godless Heathen Brian at 2:35PM on Jan 14th 2008

588. Correction;The mistake some Christians make is not allowing God to open their eyes to evil.(last 2 sentences)

aniekan thomas at 2:35PM on Jan 14th 2008

589. GHB,you better watch out,or else,i will report your comments to Lord Vader.
(ha,ha,only joking)

Please read me post.

aniekan thomas at 2:39PM on Jan 14th 2008

590. So you claim to be a good christian, as I'm sure Hitler would have. I still can't be sure.

Nope, you're both christians to me. No way to be sure that YOU won't go nuts and try to take over the world someday...

Hey, if you're really into what you say you are, following the words and ACTIONS of Christ as portrayed in the bible, you're not a bad dude. I would respect all christians if they would only do just that.

Oh, and I suppose that it won't make a difference, but can you please try to not post whole novellas to the blog? Summarize, then list your source, and I'll read it if I feel that I need to. Just put in a hyperlink to your info. I'm asking nice, and I said please... :-)

Namaste.

Godless Heathen Brian at 2:40PM on Jan 14th 2008

591. The mistake some Christians make is not allowing God to open their eyes to evil.
------------------------------------
That's WHY we atheists are HERE. Because we can see that they can't see the evil, and that they even think that we're the evil ones for trying to point it out to them!

Why aren't YOU on here talking to THEM instead of US?

Don't you think you'd do more good teaching them to properly follow christ's words and deeds as a fellow believer, than joining forces with them here to attack what we say? Since that's not very christ-like either, I mean. If they were truly like Christ, even slightly, we atheists would have absolutely NO PROBLEM with them at all!

Godless Heathen Brian at 2:46PM on Jan 14th 2008

592. http://homepages.paradise.net.nz/mischedj/ca_hitler.html

That's the preacherbabble site that one of these preacherbabble posts about hitler came from.

If you want to prove a point, try something other than a religious site, maybe. Otherwise it's preacherbabble propaganda and constructed to promote a church's agenda and need for power, control and money.

And not worth reading.

Clif Kuplen at 4:47PM on Jan 14th 2008

593. "Somber made very valid points about christianity in her initial post, points that I agree with EMPHATICALLY, points that drove me away from the church as well, points that were IMPORTANT to me, and your counterarguments contributed nothing to the discussion except a near-incredible amount of obfuscation."

Obfuscation? What was so unclear? Are you ever specific?

And what does "emphatically" really add to, "I agree"? What it suggests is that you are unwilling even to consider alternative points of view. "Agreement" connotes the intellectual; "emphatic agreement" connotes the emotional.

"You could have disputed them, but instead you attempted to invalidate them by playing around with the definitions of the words. You diluted the conversation until it was all but meaningless."

Well, make up your mind. Did I spend all my time redefining terms, or did I render the terms of the conversation meaningless? You remind me of a lawyer who is taught to use every defense possible, even contradictory defenses, to serve his client, e.g. "Your Honor, my client's dog couldn't have bitten the defendent. First, my client's dog is very nice and would never bite anyone. Second, my client doesn't even own a dog."

"You can teach him to be simpler and more direct with his christian stupidity, and he can teach you that weaving a maze of logical-sounding bullshit confusion is even better than flat-out lying, for instance."

I assume that by "simpler and more direct" you mean "give me arguments I can actually answer effectively; don't ask me questions and make points my worldview cannot deal with!" Sorry, but I won't do that.

And is my "BS" merely "logical-sounding," which of course implies that you think that it isn't actually logical? If this is so, can you point out any specific fallacies? If not, will you concede that you have no argument?

Finally, I notice that you refer to my beliefs as "Christian stupidity." Is it possible, in your view, for a person to be both a Christian and intelligent? Or, even more to the point, is it possible for a person to be intelligent as a Christian? Is a Christian, qua Christian, necessarily stupid?

Mike Valente at 5:16PM on Jan 14th 2008

594. DEMOCRATS: THE PARTY OF JIM CROW.

As we look back in the annals of history to the shock of our amazement we will the discover that the democrat party is responsible for inventing and instituting all the Jim Crow Laws that restricted us african-americans. These laws were designed to restrict and oppress us to develop a mindset of limitation and disfunction. Regardless of the ethnic puppets the media displays before the public, BET is actully owned by caucasion (white) owned company!

I believe as more people become aware of the book, "Breaking the Curse of Willie Lynch: The Science Of Slave Psychology by Alvin Morrow," every American will be shocked how the democrats continue to not only be the party that oppresses the child in the womb but the party that inspired a slave mentality that created economic plantations of dependency for voters. Democrats are practicing the tactics of Willie Lynch point by point to keep Afro-Americans divided and misguided. As an afro-american, I consider myself just American because as Rev E.V. Hill said, "although we all got to America by different boats - we are in the same boat now."

I FOUND 25 REASONS WHY MIKE HUCKABEE WINS THE NOMINATION & THE PRESIDENCY. And YES I am VOTING FOR HIM BECAUSE HE WILL DO AND

HAS DONE MORE TO HELP US THAN ANY OTHER CANDIDATE DEMOCRAT, INDEPENDENT, OR REPUBLICAN.

MIKE HUCKABEE has earned the respect of Afro-Americans and Hispanics since he was THE ONLY top ranked one who valued and respected them by attending the latest ethnic sponsored republican forum.

Also, Huckabee, as governor of Arkansas, did more to practically help the people of New Oreans, LA after Katrina than the Democrat governor of Louisiana because Huckabee's state government was so organized.

For MORE Facts check out my blog.

http://evolutionfacts.townhall.com

FORMER ATHEIST at 6:38PM on Jan 14th 2008

595. Okay Stig..

I said, ""Stalin was ruthless.. so what? They were ruthless times. If he hadn't been ruthless, he'd have probably been assassinated!
Mao was ruthless...so what? They were ruthless times. If he hadn't been ruthless, he'd have probably been assassinated!"

... and your sissy reply "SO WHAT??????? Are you serious? I'm glad you're on the other side."

In the First World War... ruthless times...

The Turks accused the (Christian) Armenians of preparing to ally themselves with Russia and saw the entire Armenian population as an enemy. The exact number of deaths is unknown. Most estimates are between 800,000 and 1.5 million.
(1914-1918... ruthless times.)

The Battle of the Somme, fought in the summer and autumn of 1916, was one of the largest battles of the First World War. With more than one million casualties, it was also one of the bloodiest battles in human history. (ruthless times)

According to the Judgment International Military Tribunal for the Far East, "estimates made at a later date indicate that the total number of civilians and prisoners of war murdered in Nanking and its vicinity during the first six weeks of the Japanese occupation[of China] was over 200,000. (Dec '37, ruthless times)

After Russia had quit WW1 in 1917 they had an estimated 1,700,000 dead and 5,000,000 wounded... no account of the missing. (ruthless times)

For comparison the USA had 58,480 dead, 189,955 wounded and 14,290 missing. (Gee, not so bad!)

Mao’s first political campaigns after founding the People’s Republic were land reform and the suppression of counter-revolutionaries.(ruthless times)

Mao himself claimed a total of 700,000 killed during the years 1949–53, however, many authors agree on a figure of between 2 million and 5 million dead.(ruthless times)

Meanwhile Stalin(which means 'steel')(Born Joseph Vissarionovich Jugashvili) was having some ruthless times himself, what with Hitler knocking on his door asking if Stalin would like to come out and play!!!

In one 'pogrom'... "The repression of so many formerly high-ranking revolutionaries and party members led Leon Trotsky to claim that a "river of blood" separated Stalin's regime from that of Lenin."

Remember these were atheist-communists that were being 'dealt with'. (ruthless times)

I could look up more incidents etc. but I think that any fair-minded person could conclude that in Europe and Asia the first half of the 20th. Century were ruthless bloody times for all concerned...

... it is easy for you to try to turn-tables on atheists by claiming that the entire thing was anti-religious, and therefore all atheists are heartless bastards...

... but that is pure propaganda. All atheists are not communists... a lot of atheist-communists were killed by Stalin because Stalin wanted to share the joy(I guess).

pboyfloyd at 7:17PM on Jan 14th 2008

596. 591. DEMOCRATS: THE PARTY OF JIM CROW.

As we look back in the annals of history to the shock of our amazement (sic) we will the discover (sic) that the democrat (sic) party is responsible for inventing and instituting all the Jim Crow Laws that restricted us african-americans

xxx

The same party drove those dixiecrat bigots over to the republican party in 1964 when Lyndon Johnson passed the Civil Rights bill.

Now the descendants of the dixiecrat bigots who switched parties are all republicans! Two outstanding examples are Strom Thurmond and Jesse Helms.

I was there through all of it and my first vote was for LBJ. All the bigots and their offspring have been republicans for forty years!

Try some other bullshit why don't you. That wouldn't get past a grade schooler. Don't count on skeptics being as gullible as believers. If we had been, you'd still be in the stone age.

If you're a black man and a republicanist, you enjoy the same status as the chickens working for colonel sanders.

Clif Kuplen at 7:38PM on Jan 14th 2008

597. 592

Who's denying the facts of history but the Atheists? Please give credit where it's due.

Your ploy?

Evade and re-direct...AGAIN. It is, however, just what I would expect. You throw out every excuse to avoid answering the charge.

"... it is easy for you to try to turn-tables on atheists by claiming that the entire thing was anti-religious, and therefore all atheists are heartless bastards... "

Are you delusional? Where have I said this? Please quote me.

"... but that is pure propaganda. All atheists are not communists...."

Or do you have a comprehension problem? When did I say this? You must be hearing the voices of The Angels of Atheism in your head.

Your arguments are both ludicrous and off-topic, and reflect a double standard of judgement that would make the most hypocritical religious fanatic proud.

The whole of human history has been brutal and ruthless. Yet, Christians are attacked for their role in history's crimes, whilst (the poor, innocent) Atheists dictators were a product of "ruthless" times and somehow this absolves their dis-belief from being an influence in their actions.

Aren't you supposed to be the rational ones?

Stig at 1:39AM on Jan 15th 2008

598. Stig, Stalin murdered at the very least 10 million people. Mao murdered at least 20 million. Pol Pot murdered one fourth of Cambodias population. All three were atheists. All three espoused communism, a social theory of Marx, changed in turn by Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot...(others in other countries). Extremists that had murders committed in the name of a theory, a theory that took on the trappings of religion, the cannonization Lenin, the cult of Stalin, the cult of Mao.

I know my deaths at the hands of communists is a very low ballpark figure. Apologists for the communists should be ashamed of the destruction of humans.

JefFlyingV at 3:51AM on Jan 15th 2008

599. Stig, anyone that has absolute power and is a fanatic, is dangerous to all. Whether they are atheists (Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Robespierre), pseudoreligionists (Hitler), religionists, all are dangerous.

JefFlyingV at 4:24AM on Jan 15th 2008

600. tim, at times wasn't this small group of tribal leaders clearing out people who were not recognized by the Koran as having faith?

And where does the word 'slave' come from? Is it traceable to Slav?

JefFlyingV at 4:31AM on Jan 15th 2008

Previous 15 Comments | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | Most Recent | Next 15 Comments

Add your comments

Please keep your comments relevant to this blog entry. Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments.

When you enter your name and email address, you'll be sent a link to confirm your comment, and a password. To leave another comment, just use that password.

To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br> tags.

Mo's Video

The Sound of a Smoke-Free Barack...
Almost two years ago we speculated on how Barack Obama's voice would change if he stopped smoking. ...

Coming Soon

Most Commented On

Coming Soon

Mo's Bio

Mo Rocca appears on a bunch of shows, including CBS News Sunday Morning (with the indescribably wonderful Charles Osgood), The Tonight Show on NBC, and NPR's Wait Wait... Don't Tell Me! He's a sometime judge on Iron Chef and was featured on Telemundo's Amore Descarado. Last year he starred on Broadway in the 25th Annual Putnam County Spelling Bee. His expose "All the President's Pets" was published by Crown in 2004.