[sarcasm]

According to your interpretation, to be anti-slavery is to be anti-Christian. I guess that by your own standard you are a heretic if you are now stating that you don't believe in slavery.

[BlackElk]

nless and until you give some coherent explanation of the significance of your silly question, why would anyone discuss it further with you. GW and I have both answered your question and I at least don't need you interpreting my answer or his when you cannot even explain your incoherent line. We both said we were anti-slavery. He said Scripture did not require the manumission of slaves. His answer and my answer and the truth as to Scripture which he posted are not inconsistent. No one in our country owns slaves. No slave exists in our country legally bound to a master. No slave has been legally purchased here or legally born into slavery here who is still alive. If the Barney Fife's have pastors and/or lawyers, you might want to go and find out what you are talking about. Even they are probably more coherent than you.

[george wythe]

According to your interpretation, to be anti-slavery is to be anti-Christian. I guess that by your own standard you are a heretic if you are now stating that you don't believe in slavery.

Since you seem to an amoral godless atheist, you have no scruples about throwing around your false accusations.

I have never said that being anti-Christian equals being anti-slavery.

You called me a “pro-slavery fundamentalist” because I quoted the Bible, period.

I have never said that I supported slavery, and the record is open for everyone to see.

You wanted to know about the historical justifications for slavery, and I kindly provided you with a biblical quote commonly used during the slavery epoch to justify slavery.

I have never said that I supported slavery, godless atheist.