[Vision2020] Aaaaaa! Slavery!
Melynda Huskey
mghuskey@hotmail.com
Sun, 12 Oct 2003 16:09:28 -0700
------=_NextPart_001_0001_01C390DB.367B3E70
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Dear Doug,
Several books of the OT, notably Leviticus and Deuteronomy, do indeed leg=
islate the terms on which the Israelites may hold slaves. But in my read=
ings of the Bible, not a single state of the Confederacy is mentioned. T=
he title of your tract is not "A Defense of Slavery among the Hebrew Peop=
les," so why bring in U.S. slaveholders at all, if the Bible is your conc=
ern?
In fact, if Biblical law was indeed your primary concern, you *might* hav=
e written a book which condemned slavery in the antebellum South. For ex=
ample, African slaves were not taken as prisoners in battle. African wom=
en were not married to their white owners, as is required by Biblical law=
, or set free after being raped. Southern slave-owners did not free thei=
r slaves after causing them permanent disability, such as the loss of a t=
ooth or an eye. Southern slaves couldn't inherit their owner/father's pr=
operty. Any of these failures to observe the Law could have served as a =
starting point for a fine denunciation of the evils of Southern slavery, =
even while you defended Biblical slavery -- if you really felt it needed =
you to undertake its defense.
Instead, you chose to write about the splendid lives enjoyed by Southern =
slaves -- about the abundant food, the simple pleasures, and the tender c=
are they received. You chose to write about what a fine thing it was for=
those black people to held as property, to be forbidden to contract lega=
lly binding marriages, to be taken from their children to tend their owne=
r's homes and children, to watch their children sold away from them, to b=
e bred against their wills to one another, to be beaten and branded and c=
hained. That's apparently your idea of the best race-relations in the hi=
story of the world.
And you're surprised that the subtle anti-racism of your position isn't c=
lear?
If Nazi womanhood doesn't appeal, may I suggest polygyny and concubinage =
as your next growth industry? There's a Biblical warrant for it every bi=
t as robust as the one for slavery, and I'm sure you'd find plenty of tak=
ers. =20
Melynda Huskey
P.S. Jack wonders why there are people of color attending Doug Wilson In=
c and its subsidiaries if the CEO is a racist. Well, I can imagine a num=
ber of alternatives: they don't know quite how bizarre his position is; =
they think he's deluded on this point, but pretty good on some others (no=
t unlike, say, Colin Powell or Condaleeza Rice on the Republican Party); =
or they find some advantage accrues to them if they're willing to ignore =
this one thing (you might call that the J.C. Watts position). I suppose =
it's even possible that there are some people of color who agree with him=
(James Meredith worked for Jesse Helms, after all.)
Note that none of those reasons precludes Doug's defense of slavery from =
being racist. The old "Some of my best friends are black" defense no lon=
ger holds much currency.Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer downloa=
d : http://explorer.msn.com
------=_NextPart_001_0001_01C390DB.367B3E70
Content-Type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<HTML><BODY STYLE=3D"font:10pt verdana; border:none;"><DIV> </DIV> <=
DIV>Dear Doug,</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Several books of the OT, nota=
bly Leviticus and Deuteronomy, do indeed legislate the terms on whic=
h the Israelites may hold slaves. But in my readings of the Bible, =
not a single state of the Confederacy is mentioned. The title of yo=
ur tract is not "A Defense of Slavery among the Hebrew Peoples," so =
why bring in U.S. slaveholders at all, if the Bible is your concern?</DIV=
> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>In fact, if Biblical law was indeed your primary=
concern, you *might* have written a book which condemned slavery in the =
antebellum South. For example, African slaves were not taken as pri=
soners in battle. African women were not married to their whit=
e owners, as is required by Biblical law, or set free after being raped.&=
nbsp; Southern slave-owners did not free their slaves after causing them =
permanent disability, such as the loss of a tooth or an eye. Southe=
rn slaves couldn't inherit their owner/father's property. Any of th=
ese failures to observe the Law could have served as a starting point for=
a fine denunciation of the evils of Southern slavery, even while you def=
ended Biblical slavery -- if you really felt it needed you to undertake i=
ts defense.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Instead, you chose to write abou=
t the splendid lives enjoyed by Southern slaves -- about the abundant foo=
d, the simple pleasures, and the tender care they received. You cho=
se to write about what a fine thing it was for those black people to held=
as property, to be forbidden to contract legally binding marriages, to b=
e taken from their children to tend their owner's homes and children=
, to watch their children sold away from them, to be bred against their w=
ills to one another, to be beaten and branded and chained. That's a=
pparently your idea of the best race-relations in the history o=
f the world.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>And you're surprised that the s=
ubtle anti-racism of your position isn't clear?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <=
DIV>If Nazi womanhood doesn't appeal, may I suggest polygyny and concubin=
age as your next growth industry? There's a Biblical warrant for it=
every bit as robust as the one for slavery, and I'm sure you'd find plen=
ty of takers. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Melynda Huskey</DIV> <DI=
V> </DIV> <DIV>P.S. Jack wonders why there are people of color=
attending Doug Wilson Inc and its subsidiaries if the CEO is a raci=
st. Well, I can imagine a number of alternatives: they don't =
know quite how bizarre his position is; they think he's deluded on this p=
oint, but pretty good on some others (not unlike, say, Colin Powell or Co=
ndaleeza Rice on the Republican Party); or they find some advantage =
accrues to them if they're willing to ignore this one thing (you might ca=
ll that the J.C. Watts position). I suppose it's even possible that=
there are some people of color who agree with him (James Meredith worked=
for Jesse Helms, after all.)</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Note that none=
of those reasons precludes Doug's defense of slavery from being racist.&=
nbsp; The old "Some of my best friends are black" defense no longer holds=
much currency.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV></BODY></HTML><br clear=3Dall><hr>=
Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : <a href=3D'http://ex=
plorer.msn.com'>http://explorer.msn.com</a><br></p>
------=_NextPart_001_0001_01C390DB.367B3E70--