open All Channels
seplocked Intergalactic Summit
blankseplocked The value of freedom
 
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6

Author Topic

Kithrus
Amarr
Defensores Fidei
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
Posted - 2011.08.29 17:44:00 - [31]
 

Edited by: Kithrus on 29/08/2011 17:55:20
Originally by: Jason Galente
Your argument would hold more weight if you were the one in shackles, Kithrus. You know not of this type of suffering because you have never experienced it, you inflict it upon others.


I'm sure it looks that way

Originally by: Malcolm Khross
Edited by: Malcolm Khross on 29/08/2011 16:12:12
Originally by: Kithrus


I think the major point has been missed here as to the core of the issue at hand.

Just amuse me for a moment and believe that my faith is the correct one. A vast universe crafted by a stern but just God. One who asks proof of our loyalty in our day to day lives. He promises us no happiness in this life but in the next should we live for Him.

How then can it stand to reason that freedom means anything if in this life its sole purpose is to serve to earn it in the next life?

That is why we Amarrians have slavery because it is only by suffering to do we stand a chance to even exist in the almighty presence of God.


See, this be where the problem comes in. A "just" god wouldn't favor one group of people o'er the next, savvy?

A "just" god would grant unto others the merits o' their deeds, be they ill or well, and punish or praise accordingly. The Amarr teach, based on their scriptures, that their god chose once that the Amarr were righteous and therefore elevated them above the rest for all eternity. No matter how righteously a person lives henceforth, if they nay be Amarr, they nay be righteous 'fore your god. That nay be just, that be partial.

Slavery nay be the only way to bring people 'fore your god, savvy? 'Sides, if you really believe that only through suffering can we see your god, I don't want to have anything to do with him.

'Course, you could also go 'bout putting yourselves in chains, slitting your wrists and maiming yourselves to prove to your god that ye be loyal to him. Me onesie? I'll go 'bout enjoyin' the life been given to me and deal with your god when I meet him.


Justice is a paradox onto itself so that argument by itself is flawed.

A force of justice truly onto itself is destructive without balancing itself with rules to limits its power to ensure that justice indeed is done.

However to prevent the winds of chaos tossing everyone around like leaves in harvest season laws are put in place which sometimes allows those near do wells to hide behind them.

Now lets enter God into this equation. God a force of Justice and Goodness which desires people belive in him and have faith is limited by His own goals. In order to achieve a scene of faith you need to have people make that leap. They however are not required to make that leap if God was completely visible. One can't have a crisis of faith if God walks among us because then He is an undisputed fact there is no leap of faith required.

Ergo God has to work through though who follow Him hence why they are elevated so that way they can lead others. Think of it as a proxy if you will.

Savvy?

Jason Galente
Gallente
mishima ryu
Posted - 2011.08.29 18:23:00 - [32]
 

The fact remains: If this is the stance that the Amarr take on the issue: suffer for God (which is preposterous), then they would suffer for God. They wouldn't chain up an entire race, make them do brute labor for them and inject them with Vitoc so they could 'suffer for God'.

God is a loving, merciful God, he doesn't want any of his people to suffer unnecessarily, that includes the Minmatar. What you are doing is of your own design and for your own selfish purposes, and you know it.


Malcolm Khross
Caldari
Wiyrkomi Honor Guard
Posted - 2011.08.29 19:16:00 - [33]
 

Originally by: Kithrus

Justice is a paradox onto itself so that argument by itself is flawed.


It only be a paradox if ye try to make it more complicated than it be. It be otherwise pretty straightforward.

Originally by: Kithrus

A force of justice truly onto itself is destructive without balancing itself with rules to limits its power to ensure that justice indeed is done.


Ignoring the fact that your statement makes less sense than anything I've ever said, what you're sayin' here is what, exactly? That your god nay be perfect and therefore has to limit himself for fear of mishandling justice? Is it nay also true that your theologians teach that god is the standard of justice? How then do you explain him mishandling his own domain, eh?

Originally by: Kithrus

However to prevent the winds of chaos tossing everyone around like leaves in harvest season laws are put in place which sometimes allows those near do wells to hide behind them.

Now lets enter God into this equation. God a force of Justice and Goodness which desires people belive in him and have faith is limited by His own goals. In order to achieve a scene of faith you need to have people make that leap. They however are not required to make that leap if God was completely visible. One can't have a crisis of faith if God walks among us because then He is an undisputed fact there is no leap of faith required.


'Course, I will say that laws be put in place to help protect and guide a greater mass o' people. Nay always mean they achieve that purpose

No denyin' the fact that it takes faith to believe in that which cannot be seen, good on you and yours for having that faith. Problem being here that what you're now preachin' has nary a thing to do with the original contesting of your argument. You're goin' on 'bout the purpose and place o' faith when all I mentioned was your abstract view o' what a "just god" would look like.

Originally by: Kithrus

Ergo God has to work through though who follow Him hence why they are elevated so that way they can lead others. Think of it as a proxy if you will.


Eh? You're supposed to be the preacher here lad, not me. God does nay have to work through his followers, he chooses to. If he had to, then he wouldn't be much o' a god. A god does nay depend on his followers, his followers depend on him.

I understand full well why people are "elevated" to servin' your god. You're ignorin' me points. Accordin' to your own Scriptures, the Amarr are chosen by god to rule o'er e'eryone else, then it goes on to say that e'en in "heaven," you're still goin' to be rulin' o'er e'eryone else. Furthermore, your own people constantly spout their superiority o'er others simply because your ancestors were chosen for bein' righteous. That does nay negate the need for you to be righteous. You try and justify slavery sayin' that it be the best way to bring people to your god but you consciously deny the fact that it isn't.

All slavery does is enforce your self-perceived right to rulin' o'er e'eryone else. If your god is "just" and "good" then he would be servin' as an example o' what justice and goodness be, not choosin' favorites and decreein' generational slavery. The latter parts be the works o' your own people, not your god.

Originally by: Kithrus
Savvy?


It just does nay suit ye, lad. Get your own word.

Faelan Maris
Posted - 2011.08.29 19:26:00 - [34]
 

Perhaps it is not that freedom has an inherent positive value, which is why everyone is having trouble providing convincing arguments in its favor for its own sake. However in my experience a lack of freedom does have a negative value.

There are many negative aspects to a lack of freedom: an uncertainty about your future with no reliable way to improve it, recriminations both in your head and from those around you, a lowering of your self-respect. You do not have to be tortured or treated badly for it to prey on your mind and undermine your sense of self-worth, but both exacerbate the situation. If you do not believe this, try being incarcerated for a while. Commit a crime, fail your duty, take a public stand against the Empress in a public square on Athra, whatever it takes to lose your freedom for a while. If you manage to survive to remember your experience, you will have a better understanding of why so many people in the cluster prefer more freedom than less in their lives.

Of course there are people who thrive under these conditions, but the fact that most of the cluster uses incarceration as a punishment - including the Empire, as I understand it - should suggest that it is almost universally considered a negative thing.

Malcolm Khross
Caldari
Wiyrkomi Honor Guard
Posted - 2011.08.29 19:28:00 - [35]
 

Originally by: Faelan Maris
Perhaps it is not that freedom has an inherent positive value, which is why everyone is having trouble providing convincing arguments in its favor for its own sake. However in my experience a lack of freedom does have a negative value.

There are many negative aspects to a lack of freedom: an uncertainty about your future with no reliable way to improve it, recriminations both in your head and from those around you, a lowering of your self-respect. You do not have to be tortured or treated badly for it to prey on your mind and undermine your sense of self-worth, but both exacerbate the situation. If you do not believe this, try being incarcerated for a while. Commit a crime, fail your duty, take a public stand against the Empress in a public square on Athra, whatever it takes to lose your freedom for a while. If you manage to survive to remember your experience, you will have a better understanding of why so many people in the cluster prefer more freedom than less in their lives.

Of course there are people who thrive under these conditions, but the fact that most of the cluster uses incarceration as a punishment - including the Empire, as I understand it - should suggest that it is almost universally considered a negative thing.


Huh. Shiny bit o' insight there, lass. Mind if I offer you a drink?

Kithrus
Amarr
Defensores Fidei
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
Posted - 2011.08.29 19:48:00 - [36]
 

Edited by: Kithrus on 29/08/2011 19:51:58
Originally by: Kithrus

Ergo God has to work through though who follow Him hence why they are elevated so that way they can lead others. Think of it as a proxy if you will.


Eh? You're supposed to be the preacher here lad, not me. God does nay have to work through his followers, he chooses to. If he had to, then he wouldn't be much o' a god. A god does nay depend on his followers, his followers depend on him.

I understand full well why people are "elevated" to servin' your god. You're ignorin' me points. Accordin' to your own Scriptures, the Amarr are chosen by god to rule o'er e'eryone else, then it goes on to say that e'en in "heaven," you're still goin' to be rulin' o'er e'eryone else. Furthermore, your own people constantly spout their superiority o'er others simply because your ancestors were chosen for bein' righteous. That does nay negate the need for you to be righteous. You try and justify slavery sayin' that it be the best way to bring people to your god but you consciously deny the fact that it isn't.

All slavery does is enforce your self-perceived right to rulin' o'er e'eryone else. If your god is "just" and "good" then he would be servin' as an example o' what justice and goodness be, not choosin' favorites and decreein' generational slavery. The latter parts be the works o' your own people, not your god.

Originally by: Kithrus
Savvy?


It just does nay suit ye, lad. Get your own word.


Do me the respect of replying to my argument as a whole then instead of cutting it apart just so you can reply with what you can handle.

The point is you can't take Justice and say 'God is justice therefor He will do this.' God is more then just justice hence why I said justice alone onto itself leads no where.

There are many aspects of God and yes He does have limits but they are self imposed by His own Will.

Let me put it simply. God takes the physical shape of a giant being and walks on Amarr. Out of His wish to not harm anyone he will walk in places where He won't step on someone. This does not mean he is limited because He can't but because he doesn't want to.

Now I grant you that God can make everything happen perfectly without fail so it all works but us in our limited minds would not grasp any of it or have the free will to honor Him for it.

Now back to reality.

Someone has to teach and someone has to follow. Do people abuse this power I suppose. Does that make it right? No.

You can't take the worst case scenario and focus on it like its the only outcome. As far as the four Empires go Amarr has a great Health and Education system, no poverty to speak of, everyone is rewarded for their hard days work and more importantly everyone has the ability to improve themselves.

Is this not the freedom you want?

My people the Khanid were once slaves too but after many years of service we became like the Amarr who have uplifted us and now we walk side by side.

My status as a holder is solid proof of this fact.

Malcolm Khross
Caldari
Wiyrkomi Honor Guard
Posted - 2011.08.29 20:03:00 - [37]
 

Edited by: Malcolm Khross on 29/08/2011 20:06:24
Kithrus, do nay be petulant lad. I did nay dissect your argument and only argue against part o' it, I cut it open and debated one part at a time. You'll notice all o' your words were still there, just sectioned so it would make more sense when I responded.

We are in agreement when ye say that God cannot be explained as simply "just and just alone," but his nature encompasses infinitely more aspects than this. The problem is that you took "justice" as part o' his aspect and used it to try and justify the practice of slavery. That was your err, not mine.

The "justice" aspect o' God has nary a thing to do with slavery. Me point to you being that slavery is nay needed to bring people to your god. Your people employ it because they can and because they believe themselves justified in doing so.

Not takin' the worst case scenario here, I'm pointin' out the case against the whole. You be the followers o' your god, so what you say and do reflects your god to others. If ye want people to believe that your god is just, good, merciful, wise, omnipotent, benevolent and whate'er else you want him to be, then you need to be showin' those qualities in yourselves, savvy?

Do nay try rationalizing slavery by discussin' justice, it will ne'er work. If you're going to try justifying slavery through your faith, base your argument on somethin' that backs it up. Say, for instance, the fact that you're your god's chosen people, or that your Scriptures indicate servitude for all others, or that ye been commanded to conquer and reclaim e'erything.

Your god did nay call it justice, he called it "the destiny of faith" or what-have-you. Your own people are the ones tryin' to justify the practice o' slavery for generations, not your god.

Also nay denying that slavery has worked for the Amarr in the past, you're livin' proof o' that (as you say), but that does nay mean it is going to work for e'eryone. Instead o' gettin' caught up in tryin' to make slavery work for e'eryone, why not spend time and resources figurin' out other ways to evangelize to people that they might actually be keen on acceptin'?

Just somethin' to ponder.

Thgil Goldcore
Amarr
Robonia
Posted - 2011.08.29 20:07:00 - [38]
 

Again catching up on some very quality posts I have missed, seems like all the action occurs when I'm asleep.

anyway, I think from Manwe's thoughts on the topic it makes alot more sense. Freedom being the ability to help the universe out in more meaningful ways than simply doing low end labor. That is value as I do find such endeavor brings far more happiness than a good meal. However, by nature of your capsuleer status, it is safe to assume that its a minority for people who can rise to such heights.

Now to respond to some other thoughts, I am under agreement that Vitoc is a horrid stuff. The origonal goal of slavery, which is conversion, is destroyed but the stuff. I have not forgotten that my people, the Khanid, where enslaved mearly 300 years before the Minmatar. The only time I can condone its use is for criminal slaves whom need control. It is a far better fate than death.

Also, I feel that the merits of slavery should be brought into light as well. If you stop and consider slavery as more of a feudal system, the entire system snaps into focus. As a holder my responsibility is to my people, my slaves. I protect them, keep them fed, and keep order. In return they provide me labor so I may continue to live up to my responsibilities. My people enjoy a very safe existence whereas they need not worry about crime or potentially deadly threats to them.

While I understand that my treatment of slaves is superior than most holders, most slaves don't live in hellish like conditions where their basic dignity is stripped from them. If I was not preoccupied with other important matters, I would be interested in the formation of an internal policing agency to monitor and improve slave treatment. Something to akin to a slave bill of rights, as it where. This could very well go with her Holiness Sarum's recent speeches on slaves.



Jason Galente
Gallente
mishima ryu
Posted - 2011.08.29 20:10:00 - [39]
 

Originally by: Thgil Goldcore
I am under agreement that Vitoc is a horrid stuff. It is a far better fate than death.





I have to disagree with you here. I would rather be dead than be a chemical slave.


Malcolm Khross
Caldari
Wiyrkomi Honor Guard
Posted - 2011.08.29 20:12:00 - [40]
 

Good on ye for your initiative, lass.

Maybe I be misunderstandin', but is there nay already a council or somethin' to govern the treatment o' slaves in the Empire?

Your example o' slavery bein' like a feudal system shines a bit o' perspective on it, sure. What I do nay understand is, could you nay accomplish the selfsame thing without using slavery? Could you nay protect, provide for, guide, educate, enlighten or whate'er without destroyin' culture and removing freedoms?


Mensha Khael Crow
Amarr
Posted - 2011.08.29 20:21:00 - [41]
 

Originally by: Thgil Goldcore

While I understand that my treatment of slaves is superior than most holders, most slaves don't live in hellish like conditions where their basic dignity is stripped from them.



I am curious as to what you base this generalization, that is more in line with the wild accusations of the Republic and their Gallante supporters than anything else.

Manwe Todako
Minmatar
Disciples of Ston
Posted - 2011.08.29 20:41:00 - [42]
 

Ms. Goldcore,
It is time to begin allowing the Spirit of your God to soften your heart instead of finding new arguments to try to soften the truth about slavery. You do not impress me as a person who is irretrievably convinced that slavery is true to your faith. Perhaps God is calling you to begin a movement of abolition among your own people. Perhaps this search for the value of freedom will lead you to your own freedom; a freedom from slavery for master and slave alike.
Manwe

Nicoletta Mithra
Amarr
Ordo Novus Mul-Zatah
Posted - 2011.08.29 21:37:00 - [43]
 

Freedom. What's the value of that?
For this we have to know the answer to the question: What is freedom?

Now looking into this thread, one gets the feeling that it is mostly one thing: a buzzword and a catch-phrase, a slogan and a rallying cry.

People aren't as much interested in what this actually is, than in what they want it to be. They're not as much interested in talk with one another - they rather talk to one another. Freedom is a word that's been used - abused, in my opinion - for power projection. it's been reduced by this to an empty shell, that can be filled on a whim with whatever you need to legitimate yourself.

That's where all the talk about slavery here stems from. You don't need to discuss slavery if you ask about the value of freedom. Freedom has it's value entirely independent of the existence or non-existence of slavery.
This is where the unprofessional criticism of Scripture stems from. There's a dictum of what Scripture means, without acknowledging that there's freedom of interpretation. Scripture is open to interpretation, it leaves us free to use it and to acquire freedom through that.
There lies as well the reason for the argument that's been fought about God in here. One side claiming that the other claims he would be theirs, at the same time claiming him for themselves. I firmly believe He is free from those limitations, but in his freedom he's free of the limitless.

And as we're all doing it, I'd like to make some use of the buzzword as well. Though I pray, that this one is good:

Liberty is the right to choose. Freedom is the result of the right choice.

So:
Freedom. What's the value of that?
The value of freedom, then, lies with righteousness, or, that you did what is good not merely because you had to, but because you wanted to.

Jason Galente
Gallente
mishima ryu
Posted - 2011.08.29 21:50:00 - [44]
 

Originally by: Nicoletta Mithra
Freedom. What's the value of that?
For this we have to know the answer to the question: What is freedom?

Now looking into this thread, one gets the feeling that it is mostly one thing: a buzzword and a catch-phrase, a slogan and a rallying cry.

People aren't as much interested in what this actually is, than in what they want it to be. They're not as much interested in talk with one another - they rather talk to one another. Freedom is a word that's been used - abused, in my opinion - for power projection. it's been reduced by this to an empty shell, that can be filled on a whim with whatever you need to legitimate yourself.

That's where all the talk about slavery here stems from. You don't need to discuss slavery if you ask about the value of freedom. Freedom has it's value entirely independent of the existence or non-existence of slavery.
This is where the unprofessional criticism of Scripture stems from. There's a dictum of what Scripture means, without acknowledging that there's freedom of interpretation. Scripture is open to interpretation, it leaves us free to use it and to acquire freedom through that.
There lies as well the reason for the argument that's been fought about God in here. One side claiming that the other claims he would be theirs, at the same time claiming him for themselves. I firmly believe He is free from those limitations, but in his freedom he's free of the limitless.

And as we're all doing it, I'd like to make some use of the buzzword as well. Though I pray, that this one is good:

Liberty is the right to choose. Freedom is the result of the right choice.

So:
Freedom. What's the value of that?
The value of freedom, then, lies with righteousness, or, that you did what is good not merely because you had to, but because you wanted to.


You conveniently work around the fact that the freedom we discuss is the freedom of even the most basic, inalienable rights. It's easy for one to make a cliche of freedom when he or she has never had it taken from them.


Nicoletta Mithra
Amarr
Ordo Novus Mul-Zatah
Posted - 2011.08.29 21:53:00 - [45]
 

Cpt. Galente,

if it's inalienable, how can it be taken from you?

Faithfully
N. Mithra

Jason Galente
Gallente
mishima ryu
Posted - 2011.08.29 22:03:00 - [46]
 

Originally by: Nicoletta Mithra
Cpt. Galente,

if it's inalienable, how can it be taken from you?

Faithfully
N. Mithra


Captain Mithra,

While these rights are indeed inalienable, under the physical and mental strains that slaves are subjected to being bent to the will of another, many will not risk the crack of a whip, and suddenly these things are replaced by an instinct for survival, and their free will is broken. Situational degradation, you could call it.

I referred to them as 'inalienable' because that is what they were considered in my old home. Of course, things such as natural liberties were respected and left well enough alone in the Gallente Federation, something I cannot say about the Amarr Empire. Did this clear things up for you?




Malcolm Khross
Caldari
Wiyrkomi Honor Guard
Posted - 2011.08.29 22:14:00 - [47]
 

Liberty be almost exclusively in reference to freedom from something, such as control, government, captivity or slavery.
Freedom be a more general term, referring to the state of existence in which on is free to act without restraint or external control.

By that sense, liberty be more about a political or physical freedom whereas freedom, being discussed here, be more about personal and ethical freedom.

The value o' freedom is clearly a personal thing, this thread demonstrates that quite clearly.

Nicoletta Mithra
Amarr
Ordo Novus Mul-Zatah
Posted - 2011.08.29 22:18:00 - [48]
 

Cpt. Galente,

actually, I still think that you're not really talking about anything but are merely combining buzzwords. You throw freedom, the right of(to?) freedom, free will and liberty into a single pot and make a stew of slogans out of it.

That's my humble opinion, at least. If you're of the opinion I have been using any cliché of freedom, I'd advise you to re-read and think about what I've written.

Faithfully
N. Mithra

Thgil Goldcore
Amarr
Robonia
Posted - 2011.08.29 22:42:00 - [49]
 

Well the entire idea of this conversation was to determine if freedom was a catchy buzzword simply to demonize the empire, or if it had any true value to it. As I see it now, its a mixture of both. Some individuals (particularly in the federation) use it simply as a handy buzzword to justify their actions and their sins. As one early poster had noted I would not understand freedom since I have always had it.... This would apply to the Federation would it not? However there are some who understand it on a deeper level, far deeper than I, who it does hold a measurable value to. Those are the people I meant to find with this, and I believe I have gotten what I came for, in that I am pleased.

Now, my views on slavery often lead people to think I'm just one step away from freeing my slaves. While I do care very deeply for my subjects, God placed me in a position to take care and guide my flock. I will not betray his divine will, nor the trust of my people. They are within my loving grasp and I will not let go. But know they are very well cared for and we share a trust that is far deeper than many could understand.

Jason Galente
Gallente
mishima ryu
Posted - 2011.08.29 22:53:00 - [50]
 

Originally by: Thgil Goldcore
Well the entire idea of this conversation was to determine if freedom was a catchy buzzword simply to demonize the empire, or if it had any true value to it. As I see it now, its a mixture of both. Some individuals (particularly in the federation) use it simply as a handy buzzword to justify their actions and their sins. As one early poster had noted I would not understand freedom since I have always had it.... This would apply to the Federation would it not? However there are some who understand it on a deeper level, far deeper than I, who it does hold a measurable value to. Those are the people I meant to find with this, and I believe I have gotten what I came for, in that I am pleased.

Now, my views on slavery often lead people to think I'm just one step away from freeing my slaves. While I do care very deeply for my subjects, God placed me in a position to take care and guide my flock. I will not betray his divine will, nor the trust of my people. They are within my loving grasp and I will not let go. But know they are very well cared for and we share a trust that is far deeper than many could understand.


I believe you were referring to me, Miss. First of all, allow me to correct you: I was born and raised in the Federation, but am not beholden to it. I live in Caldari space. Second, you are correct: I have always enjoyed freedom, but my mother did not have that luxury. She was a slave to a very cruel Amarrian holder. Knowing what I know about how cruel holders can be, I've come to the conclusion that no man should be able to hold another man in bondage. Such is playing God. This is why I believe that slavery is an affront to Him.



Mitara Newelle
Amarr
PIE Inc.
Posted - 2011.08.30 02:45:00 - [51]
 

Originally by: Jason Galente
... under the physical and mental strains that slaves are subjected to being bent to the will of another, many will not risk the crack of a whip, and suddenly these things are replaced by an instinct for survival, and their free will is broken. Situational degradation, you could call it.


From what the other races would call a 'free will', yes, that's the point.

"Only through many hardships
Is a man stripped to his very foundations
And in such a state
Devoid of distractions
Is his soul free to soar
And in this
He is closest to God"
- The Scriptures, Book of Missions 42:5


Rodj Blake
Amarr
PIE Inc.
Posted - 2011.08.30 11:05:00 - [52]
 

Originally by: Mitara Newelle
Originally by: Jason Galente
... under the physical and mental strains that slaves are subjected to being bent to the will of another, many will not risk the crack of a whip, and suddenly these things are replaced by an instinct for survival, and their free will is broken. Situational degradation, you could call it.


From what the other races would call a 'free will', yes, that's the point.



Indeed.

What some people call a lack of free will, I prefer to call civilisation.

Manwe Todako
Minmatar
Disciples of Ston
Posted - 2011.08.30 13:28:00 - [53]
 

Originally by: Thgil Goldcore
Now, my views on slavery often lead people to think I'm just one step away from freeing my slaves. While I do care very deeply for my subjects, God placed me in a position to take care and guide my flock. I will not betray his divine will, nor the trust of my people. They are within my loving grasp and I will not let go. But know they are very well cared for and we share a trust that is far deeper than many could understand.



I ran this response by Ston before submitting it to you, Ms. Goldcore. I wanted to make sure that I did not represent the Disciples without someone else to review my reaction.

I had thought you to be a fairly well-reasoned individual until I read this statement in your recent post. Please do not think that I am insulting you by questioning your reasoning. I am warning you that your perception of yourself represents the height of religious arrogance. “My Flock?” “My Flock?” Please tell me you are not serious. “Your loving grasp?” “We share a trust?”

Is God pleased with your messiah complex? Is God pleased with you trying to displace him as Savior? Is God pleased with your presumption to be for His people what only He can be? Perhaps it is time to bring you back to reality. They are not your flock; they are your Thralls. You are not their shepherd; you are their owner. They are not in your loving grasp; they are enslaved by you. You do not share a trust with your slaves. They give you what they know you expect and need. They are wise enough to make the best of their situation, but they do not trust you.

Your slaves are not within your loving grasp. No, they are within your fearful clenches. You are afraid to free them. You are afraid to admit that you have created a god within your own image to justify the injustices of your culture. You are afraid that if you let go of this self-made god, you may spark reformation first in yourself, then in others. You are afraid of being called “heretic.” You are afraid of the cost of justice. You, Ms. Goldcore, will never understand the value of freedom until you value it enough to free those you have enslaved.

On Behalf of the Disciples of Ston
Manwe

Banichi Malguri
Amarr
Quest Shipping
Posted - 2011.08.30 14:43:00 - [54]
 

Originally by: Kithrus
Edited by: Kithrus on 29/08/2011 19:51:58
<snip>
My people the Khanid were once slaves too but after many years of service we became like the Amarr who have uplifted us and now we walk side by side.

My status as a holder is solid proof of this fact.


Brother, with respect, I would suggest you revisit your study of history.

Very few Khanid where enslaved when we first met our lords on Athra. Indeed we have mainly served as freeborn subject warriors in the Empire's service until the house that bears our name split off to form the kingdom. I refer you to this summary of our history as proof of my claim.

Mekhana
Gallente
Spiritus Draconis
Posted - 2011.08.30 15:06:00 - [55]
 

Let's not forget a slave would not even be allowed to partake in this argument. Nor would he actually know what freedom is, either because he was born into that life or would eventually have lost the will to be set free.

A person's fate should not be tied to his birth. Humans are meant to become the person they are through their actions alone. Servitude and faith are dubious concepts. I for one, believe a man or woman should only serve himself or herself, or their fellows but only if desired so. If I can't make decisions or choose my own path in life, then it has lost all meaning. This is stripping someone of the very things that make them human.







Kithrus
Amarr
Defensores Fidei
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
Posted - 2011.08.30 15:38:00 - [56]
 

Edited by: Kithrus on 30/08/2011 15:40:02
Originally by: Banichi Malguri
Originally by: Kithrus
Edited by: Kithrus on 29/08/2011 19:51:58
<snip>
My people the Khanid were once slaves too but after many years of service we became like the Amarr who have uplifted us and now we walk side by side.

My status as a holder is solid proof of this fact.


Brother, with respect, I would suggest you revisit your study of history.

Very few Khanid where enslaved when we first met our lords on Athra. Indeed we have mainly served as freeborn subject warriors in the Empire's service until the house that bears our name split off to form the kingdom. I refer you to this summary of our history as proof of my claim.



I speak with great generalization not dates and times. But to put history into focus as its stated is 'during the original reclaiming'. Our race was very receptive of the faith so our amalgamation of the scriptures and the truth of God was a speedy one compared to say others.

The point simply is that we are proof that the Amarr are not taking slaves because they can but because there is a high greater purpose in mind for the race in question.

Also more on point to the topic free will or freedom means nothing without rules. Its like writing a sonnet.

You have 14 restriction but in those lines you can say what you will with keeping to the rhythm.

Some people would call that art, others would call that restrictions to the mind.

I call it order and design.

Malcolm Khross
Caldari
Wiyrkomi Honor Guard
Posted - 2011.08.30 16:04:00 - [57]
 

Originally by: Mekhana
Let's not forget a slave would not even be allowed to partake in this argument. Nor would he actually know what freedom is, either because he was born into that life or would eventually have lost the will to be set free.

A person's fate should not be tied to his birth. Humans are meant to become the person they are through their actions alone. Servitude and faith are dubious concepts. I for one, believe a man or woman should only serve himself or herself, or their fellows but only if desired so. If I can't make decisions or choose my own path in life, then it has lost all meaning. This is stripping someone of the very things that make them human.



Have to disagree on principle with ye, love. A person's "fate" is irreversibly tied to their birth regardless. Mayhaps not slave or free, but a person's birth and raising irrevocably affects their destiny.

More to the point be the matter o' the last statement. If ye be saying that slavery stips a person o' all that makes 'em human, then ye be justifyin' inhumane treatment o' 'em, since they be animals more than humans now. The argument 'gainst slavery be that they remain humans in spite o' their slavery and thus should nay be subject to slavery. Freedom o' will and freedom o' choice do not make humanity, they are simply consequences o' freedom.


As to ye, Kithrus.

Ye make a good illustration with your reference to sonnet, but there's a catch and it be the same catch that I were tellin' ye before. Nay e'ery poet goin' to limit themselves to a sonnet, see? Some nay find their artistic curve within the confines of the sonnet, so they choose to write in haiku, free form or even prose. In the end, it all be art, it all be ordered and structured, but it nay all be the same form to reach the same end.

If ye be going to compare personages to artists, then ye have to understand that each artist be different and need to be approached and understood differently. One form nay work for all, savvy?

Jason Galente
Gallente
mishima ryu
Posted - 2011.08.30 16:08:00 - [58]
 

Originally by: Kithrus


Also more on point to the topic free will or freedom means nothing without rules. Its like writing a sonnet.


I prefer prose.

Quote:

I call it order and design.


I call it conformity.


Kithrus
Amarr
Defensores Fidei
Curatores Veritatis Alliance
Posted - 2011.08.30 20:04:00 - [59]
 

Edited by: Kithrus on 30/08/2011 20:04:56
Originally by: Malcolm Khross


As to ye, Kithrus.

Ye make a good illustration with your reference to sonnet, but there's a catch and it be the same catch that I were tellin' ye before. Nay e'ery poet goin' to limit themselves to a sonnet, see? Some nay find their artistic curve within the confines of the sonnet, so they choose to write in haiku, free form or even prose. In the end, it all be art, it all be ordered and structured, but it nay all be the same form to reach the same end.

If ye be going to compare personages to artists, then ye have to understand that each artist be different and need to be approached and understood differently. One form nay work for all, savvy?


I suppose if you want to extend the metaphor that much it could sound that way but I'm sure you all heard 'we are the writers of our own fate'. It is that sence I speak.

But I digress

No I supposed not everyone wants to be a poet and still less want to write at all. There are many things in life we do not want to do but do to maintain structure.

We pay our bills, taxes and our wages to those who work for us. We attend meetings, perform scouting missions cloaked alone for hours in systems next to no one enters.

We do these things however because other people depend on us to do them and its the proper thing to do.

The Amarr asked me to be a warrior they didn't ask me how. I became a cyberknight. That was my freedom in the sonnet and I feel fulfillment in doing my masters work in the way that best suites me.

You may retort: 'Slave don't have said freedom.'

If one of my slaves after being instructed to care for my fathers vineyard came to me and said 'Lord, I have found a method that is different then what you laid out but I think if you will allow me I can increase the harvest with less cost and labor.'

I would be both humbled by his willingness to embraces Gods task for him and reward him for his desire to go above his call. This could in time easily result in his uplifting and release.

In such good graces I may even welcome him to stay as a paid steward of my farms. His family freed and allowed to grow as he now leads those before him.

This is all I want for those God has given me.

Malcolm Khross
Caldari
Wiyrkomi Honor Guard
Posted - 2011.08.30 20:09:00 - [60]
 

Originally by: Kithrus

I would be both humbled by his willingness to embraces Gods task for him and reward him for his desire to go above his call. This could in time easily result in his uplifting and release.



Statin' for the record that I do nay doubt the sincerity o' your heart and purpose, love. Ye honestly believe that ye be doin' good for those 'round ye and followin' the will o' your God. We disagree on principle, more-or-less.

See, what you say be "God's task" for your slave, I see as your task to him. Ye be the one what told him to tend the vineyards, ye be the one checking his progress, ye be the one he answers to, see?

It be a difference o' perspective that simply nay be reconcilable. Here's hopin' ye come to see that slavery nay be the answer and God be havin' a better way to reach out.

This drink's for ye, lad.


Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6

This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


 


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to https://forums.eveonline.com

These forums are archived and read-only