Sexual Sin vs Other Sin

[Tropicana]

What do you think blugiant?

Also, hate to break it to you but some of the relationships (a minority)....don't know what percentage....were consensual fornication. Likely they started as coercive relationships but we don't know for sure. Some of these relationships between white men and women who were slaves or free Black went on for years. The men gave their children their names, gave the women and children their freedom. Some of the women and children inherited their "property" including slaves. What a sinting. I started a discussion about that up soh. What a disgrace.

http://www.jamaicans.com/forums/showthread.php?180558-Black-People-Owning-Slaves

Even look at that pond scum Thomas Thistlewood. He has got to be the lowest of the lowlifes. He was lower than pond scum, the puss on a tic on a flea on an amoeba. What do you make of his relationships with Phibbah and Abba?

http://scholar.library.miami.edu/slaves/womens_resistance/individual_essays/polovna.html

The whole history is a messy business.

[Wahalla]

We as Americans are not blessed just because of our excessive financial ability nor because we have a strong military. We’re blessed only because our forefathers chose to honor God and root the foundations of our republic on godliness and spiritual values.

First off yanki hegemony!!!!!!! The united states is powerful because a number of factors none of which are morality or honoring a god or spirituality ...Much of these factors are identical to those that contributed to the development of historical hegemons, which extended over multiple generations. Ease of communications, a developing elite while allowing some social mobility, exclusion of majorities, technological superioty, succession process, tolerance of belief, superior military potential, geographic isolation from similar strength competing rivals allowing development once initially established .

An examination of yanki history in parrel with other empires demonstrates it is not morality that led to the success of the empire rather it was cold hard circumstance. Babylon, Mexica (we call them Aztec), Khmer, Great Zimbabwaye, Greece, Egypt, Persia, the Spanish, British, Austro-Hungarian, the innumerable Chinese dynasties, Moghul, Original Islamic multiple Calipahtes, the Post Khan success of the Golden Horde and the Yanki Republic have alot in common... And yet it is not adherence to a single political system nor worshipping of a single deity or a single god worship that caused the development of power.

The basis of the entire american myth is based on distorting the truth from the its creation myth that it was yanki exceptionalism that led to its success. In the next century.

The Romans prosecuted the Christians not because they were Christians but because they were intolerant. And this intolerance cut at the heart of the Pax Romana. Rome was a multi religious society with infinate gods. so adherance to a philosphy that denies at it heart all other beleif systems is poltically dangerous. .. not because they were christians.

. Like the spartans and other Greek nation states the root of the exclusion was based on the family: essentially racial if you will. The age of Perikles in Greece the elites were the descendants of invading Aryans from north.with the majority Helots the aboriginal greeks.. Like the Indian Pre -Islamic state identical, the elites of china till the fall of the Empire in 21 was the Manchu families, before that the Xing, the Ming, ect.... interestingly in the time of the Greek golden age it was socially acceptable for a man to publicly masturbate ! Note i dont mention the Zulus or the Proto-Jewish state

In terms of longevity then the best gods to honour or best morality is by far Egyptian as their hegemonic power last 20 to thirty times as long as yankidom... So maybe to ensure prosperity we should follow their example get a male high priest to masturbate into a river to greet the morning sun rise .. And / or get the head of state to do so once a year publicly! Maybe public masturbation is the common cause of powerful empires. A equally credible theory as to Christian based morality!

I could then do an analysis of the political-economic significance of the Mississippi river basin and its long navigable stretches and demonstrate why this is analogous to the development in both Egypt and the fertile crescent but we all know it was God....

and it has to be confirmed by a cousin.. And wahalla not too bright, is a sell out and unconscious!

[franksterr]

First off yanki hegemony!!!!!!! The united states is powerful because a number of factors none of which are morality or honoring a god or spirituality ...Much of these factors are identical to those that contributed to the development of historical hegemons, which extended over multiple generations. Ease of communications, a developing elite while allowing some social mobility, exclusion of majorities, technological superioty, succession process, tolerance of belief, superior military potential, geographic isolation from similar strength competing rivals allowing development once initially established .

An examination of yanki history in parrel with other empires demonstrates it is not morality that led to the success of the empire rather it was cold hard circumstance. Babylon, Mexica (we call them Aztec), Khmer, Great Zimbabwaye, Greece, Egypt, Persia, the Spanish, British, Austro-Hungarian, the innumerable Chinese dynasties, Moghul, Original Islamic multiple Calipahtes, the Post Khan success of the Golden Horde and the Yanki Republic have alot in common... And yet it is not adherence to a single political system nor worshipping of a single deity or a single god worship that caused the development of power.

The basis of the entire american myth is based on distorting the truth from the its creation myth that it was yanki exceptionalism that led to its success. In the next century.

The Romans prosecuted the Christians not because they were Christians but because they were intolerant. And this intolerance cut at the heart of the Pax Romana. Rome was a multi religious society with infinate gods. so adherance to a philosphy that denies at it heart all other beleif systems is poltically dangerous. .. not because they were christians.

. Like the spartans and other Greek nation states the root of the exclusion was based on the family: essentially racial if you will. The age of Perikles in Greece the elites were the descendants of invading Aryans from north.with the majority Helots the aboriginal greeks.. Like the Indian Pre -Islamic state identical, the elites of china till the fall of the Empire in 21 was the Manchu families, before that the Xing, the Ming, ect.... interestingly in the time of the Greek golden age it was socially acceptable for a man to publicly masturbate ! Note i dont mention the Zulus or the Proto-Jewish state

In terms of longevity then the best gods to honour or best morality is by far Egyptian as their hegemonic power last 20 to thirty times as long as yankidom... So maybe to ensure prosperity we should follow their example get a male high priest to masturbate into a river to greet the morning sun rise .. And / or get the head of state to do so once a year publicly! Maybe public masturbation is the common cause of powerful empires. A equally credible theory as to Christian based morality!

I could then do an analysis of the political-economic significance of the Mississippi river basin and its long navigable stretches and demonstrate why this is analogous to the development in both Egypt and the fertile crescent but we all know it was God....

and it has to be confirmed by a cousin.. And wahalla not too bright, is a sell out and unconscious!

True......National success has more to do with the mastery of old technologies and techniques and the introduction of new technologies and techniques than most anything else.
Not even the God of the bible could defeat the technological advance cultures of biblical times.

[franksterr]

What do you think blugiant?

Also, hate to break it to you but some of the relationships (a minority)....don't know what percentage....were consensual fornication. Likely they started as coercive relationships but we don't know for sure. Some of these relationships between white men and women who were slaves or free Black went on for years. The men gave their children their names, gave the women and children their freedom. Some of the women and children inherited their "property" including slaves. What a sinting. I started a discussion about that up soh. What a disgrace.

http://www.jamaicans.com/forums/showthread.php?180558-Black-People-Owning-Slaves

Even look at that pond scum Thomas Thistlewood. He has got to be the lowest of the lowlifes. He was lower than pond scum, the puss on a tic on a flea on an amoeba. What do you make of his relationships with Phibbah and Abba?

http://scholar.library.miami.edu/slaves/womens_resistance/individual_essays/polovna.html

The whole history is a messy business.

No matter what the percentage are or was sex between a enslaver (kidnapper) and the enslave(kidnap victim/prisoner) should never be considered consensual....in such a relationship there is always either explicit or implicit threats to ones well being to deny your owner his property or pleasure - which makes it coercion. - If One cannot deny consent, then one cannot truly give consent.

Lastly there is the matter of informed consent.....as in being conned - sextortion/blackmail.