[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

"International court’s attack on Israel a sign of the free world’s moral collapse"

"Pete Hegseth Is Right for the DOD"

"Why Our Constitution Secures Liberty, Not Democracy"

Woodworking and Construction Hacks

"CNN: Reporters Were Crying and Hugging in the Hallways After Learning of Matt Gaetz's AG Nomination"

"NEW: Democrat Officials Move to Steal the Senate Race in Pennsylvania, Admit to Breaking the Law"

"Pete Hegseth Is a Disruptive Choice for Secretary of Defense. That’s a Good Thing"

Katie Britt will vote with the McConnell machine

Battle for Senate leader heats up — Hit pieces coming from Thune and Cornyn.

After Trump’s Victory, There Can Be No Unity Without A Reckoning

Vivek Ramaswamy, Dark-horse Secretary of State Candidate

Megyn Kelly has a message for Democrats. Wait for the ending.

Trump to choose Tom Homan as his “Border Czar”

"Trump Shows Demography Isn’t Destiny"

"Democrats Get a Wake-Up Call about How Unpopular Their Agenda Really Is"

Live Election Map with ticker shows every winner.

Megyn Kelly Joins Trump at His Final PA Rally of 2024 and Explains Why She's Supporting Him

South Carolina Lawmaker at Trump Rally Highlights Story of 3-Year-Old Maddie Hines, Killed by Illegal Alien

GOP Demands Biden, Harris Launch Probe into Twice-Deported Illegal Alien Accused of Killing Grayson Davis

Previously-Deported Illegal Charged With Killing Arkansas Children’s Hospital Nurse in Horror DUI Crash

New Data on Migrant Crime Rates Raises Eyebrows, Alarms

Thousands of 'potentially fraudulent voter registration applications' Uncovered, Stopped in Pennsylvania

Michigan Will Count Ballot of Chinese National Charged with Voting Illegally

"It Did Occur" - Kentucky County Clerk Confirms Voting Booth 'Glitch'' Shifted Trump Votes To Kamala

Legendary Astronaut Buzz Aldrin 'wholeheartedly' Endorses Donald Trump

Liberal Icon Naomi Wolf Endorses Trump: 'He's Being More Inclusive'

(Washed Up Has Been) Singer Joni Mitchell Screams 'F*** Trump' at Hollywood Bowl

"Analysis: The Final State of the Presidential Race"

He’ll, You Pieces of Garbage

The Future of Warfare -- No more martyrdom!

"Kamala’s Inane Talking Points"

"The Harris Campaign Is Testament to the Toxicity of Woke Politics"

Easy Drywall Patch

Israel Preparing NEW Iran Strike? Iran Vows “Unimaginable” Response | Watchman Newscast

In Logansport, Indiana, Kids are Being Pushed Out of Schools After Migrants Swelled County’s Population by 30%: "Everybody else is falling behind"

Exclusive — Bernie Moreno: We Spend $110,000 Per Illegal Migrant Per Year, More than Twice What ‘the Average American Makes’

Florida County: 41 of 45 People Arrested for Looting after Hurricanes Helene and Milton are Noncitizens

Presidential race: Is a Split Ticket the only Answer?

hurricanes and heat waves are Worse

'Backbone of Iran's missile industry' destroyed by IAF strikes on Islamic Republic

Joe Rogan Experience #2219 - Donald Trump

IDF raids Hezbollah Radwan Forces underground bases, discovers massive cache of weapons

Gallant: ‘After we strike in Iran,’ the world will understand all of our training

The Atlantic Hit Piece On Trump Is A Psy-Op To Justify Post-Election Violence If Harris Loses

Six Al Jazeera journalists are Hamas, PIJ terrorists

Judge Aileen Cannon, who tossed Trump's classified docs case, on list of proposed candidates for attorney general

Iran's Assassination Program in Europe: Europe Goes Back to Sleep

Susan Olsen says Brady Bunch revival was cancelled because she’s MAGA.

Foreign Invaders crisis cost $150B in 2023, forcing some areas to cut police and fire services: report

Israel kills head of Hezbollah Intelligence.


Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Satans Mark/Cashless
See other Satans Mark/Cashless Articles

Title: After slavery, trafficked fishermen face lonely road to recovery
Source: Reuters
URL Source: https://ca.news.yahoo.com/slavery-t ... y-road-recovery-094114008.html
Published: Jul 12, 2015
Author: Astrid Zweynert
Post Date: 2015-07-12 19:40:51 by nativist nationalist
Keywords: None
Views: 6087
Comments: 25

When hundreds of fishermen were rescued from a life of slavery on Thai fishing boats off the coast of Indonesia earlier this year, the world took notice.

Trafficked and sold to work on the boats, the men - mostly from Myanmar and Cambodia - had endured beatings, abuse and torture.

After they were freed, however, they had little support to help them recover from the horrors they had experienced.

"Everyone is shocked when they hear about the conditions on these fishing boats - but then what? No money is available to help them after they've been rescued," said Lisa Rende Taylor, director of Project Issara, a public- private alliance to tackle trafficking in Southeast Asia's supply chains.

Donor countries in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development allocate about $120 million each year to combat modern slavery - a sum dwarfed by the $150 billion in estimated profits each year from the human trafficking industry.

Governments and donors mostly fund support for women and girls trafficked for sex, but there is little money for male trafficking survivors, many of whom have suffered and witnessed extreme violence.

Trafficked fishermen are forced to work up to 20 hours a day, endure beatings and sexual assault, and have seen injured colleagues thrown overboard and left to drown, researchers have found.

Deprived of pay, those able to return home are penniless, making them feel worthless.

"Male survivors tend to feel a crushing sense of shame that they, as breadwinners, come back with nothing," said Nicola Pocock, a researcher at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine.

"A lot of them return to poor rural areas and find limited job opportunities, which is why they migrated in the first place," said Pocock, who co-authored the largest ever study into the health of trafficking victims in Southeast Asia, published earlier this year.

The study found that 57 percent of men trafficked for work on fishing boats and other forms of forced labor showed symptoms of depression, while 46 percent suffered from anxiety and 41 percent were affected by post-traumatic stress disorder.

PRESUMED DEAD

After many years away, some trafficked men find their wives have remarried and their families have long assumed they had died because no money was ever sent home.

The welcome home may be mixed, said Mike Nowlin, of Hagar Cambodia, a charity that helps rescued Cambodian fishermen find work, deal with their trauma and reunite with their families.

"Often families don't understand the horrific environment that the survivors were in, and are only aware that their family members were not sending money home as promised," Nowlin said.

"They (the men) may be asked why they were away for three, five or 10 years and bring home nothing to support the family."

Some choose not to go home at all for fear of rejection or because they may have been unable to contact their relatives.

Daren Coulston, a New Zealand-based anti-slavery campaigner who has provided assistance for trafficked Indonesian fishermen, said many were reluctant to discuss their trauma.

"I learned that many of them had been cheated of their wages, subjected to beatings and in some cases, sexually assaulted by the ships' officers," Coulston said.

"It's hard to talk about these experiences for men. Most of them rather pretend it never happened," said Coulston, a former deep-sea fisherman. "But for their mental health, they need all the help and support they can get." Rende Taylor said a lack of assistance for male trafficking survivors made them highly vulnerable to fall prey to traffickers again.

The dearth of funds for support prompted Project Issara to seek direct online donations from the public through a crowdfunding website.

THE POWER OF COUNSELING

One young man, who asked not to be named, was trafficked to Thailand from Cambodia by a relative at the age of eight, and says without counseling and specialized support, he would not have been able to survive.

For years, he was forced to beg on the streets, beaten and starved. He was 12 when he was referred to Hagar, received counseling and art therapy, and was sent to a school for trauma survivors.

Now 25, he is studying psychology in Phnom Penh and wants to open a charity for trafficked children.

"I was in a bad way when I first came here, always angry and breaking things," he said at Hagar's Phnom Penh office.

"The counseling and the chance to reflect in a safe environment really helped me to deal with what I had lived through. It's really important to have that kind of help."


Poster Comment:

...$150 billion in estimated profits each year from the human trafficking industry.

A lot of seafood gets imported into America form the area where these men worked as slaves for the industry. The left wing globalist billionaires pushing Obamatrade are the sameones who like to get all preachy about the confederate flag. They make a big deal about slavery 150 years ago; while they reap some of the profits from slavery happening today.

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

#1. To: nativist nationalist (#0)

Slavers deserve death. Their property should be redistributed to the slaves they exploited. This is justice. Conpanies that profit from the depressed profits obtained by utilizing slave-made goods should pay punitive damages of the entire economic damages they received, plus quintuple damages, on the first offense. On the second, they should be put out of business and the wealth of their owners expropriated and paid to the slaves.

Slavers deserve death. Those who knowingly profit from slavery are slavers and deserve death. Those who ought to know they're profiting from slavery but who choose to turn a blind eye deserve punitive damages.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-07-12   20:03:08 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#2. To: Vicomte13 (#1)

Slavers deserve death.

The Apostle Paul returned an escaped slave. That I asked you about on another thread you are dodging.

Does the Apostle Paul deserve death?

What about people who returned escaped slaves in the Unite Sates in the past?

A K A Stone  posted on  2015-07-12   20:05:03 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#3. To: Vicomte13 (#1)

Those who ought to know they're profiting from slavery but who choose to turn a blind eye deserve punitive damages.

So what should have happened to the Apostle Paul?

A K A Stone  posted on  2015-07-12   20:06:11 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#4. To: A K A Stone (#2)

The Apostle Paul did not return an escaped slave. He had no power whatever to do that.

What he did, was to TELL an escaped slave, Onesimus, to return to his master, and sent a letter telling his master to remember that Onesimus was a Christian, useful to Paul, and to be treated thereafter as a brother, not a slave.

Onesimus could have chosen to walk away and not return. The Apostle Paul was not a public official. He did not bind Onesimus' hands and send him back in chains. He admonished him verbally to return with a message to Philemon, telling Philemon to treat him as a brother in Christ.

Onesimus had the choice to return or not, obviously. Philemon, on Onesimus' return, had the choice to treat his fellow Christian as a brother, or to reject Paul, and Christ, treat a fellow Christian brother as a slave, and burn in hell for eternity.

Did Onesimus actually do what Paul told him? If he did, did Philemon behave according to the Christian principle Paul laid out? We have no way of knowing.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-07-12   20:18:50 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#5. To: A K A Stone (#3)

The Apostle Paul did not profit from anything. He told a slave to return to his former owner, and told the owner to treat Onesimus as his brother. Had Paul hauled Onesimus back in chains, he would deserve death.

But then, Paul was responsible for so many Christian deaths, he deserved death, and he eventually got that death, too, at the hands of the Romans, in a process as unjust as what Paul himself had done earlier in his life. As he measured, so it was measured out to him.

But after that bloody death, Paul had the great hope of acceptance by Christ, for having turned. God did not spare Paul the execution he deserved, just as God spares no one the death we each deserve for our sins. But we have good reason to hope, as Paul did, that God has rewarded Paul for his faithful apostleship.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-07-12   20:21:58 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#6. To: Vicomte13 (#1)

Slavers deserve death. Those who knowingly profit from slavery are slavers and deserve death. Those who ought to know they're profiting

Let's nuke the whole world. Every benefited and harmed by slavery. Everyone knows and ignores the truth.

Justified  posted on  2015-07-12   20:28:52 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#7. To: Vicomte13 (#1)

Btw I think those that enslave others should be enslaved themselves.

Justified  posted on  2015-07-12   20:41:54 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#8. To: Vicomte13 (#4)

The Apostle Paul did not return an escaped slave. He had no power whatever to do that.

What he did, was to TELL an escaped slave, Onesimus, to return to his master, and sent a letter telling his master to remember that Onesimus was a Christian, useful to Paul, and to be treated thereafter as a brother, not a slave.

Onesimus could have chosen to walk away and not return. The Apostle Paul was not a public official. He did not bind Onesimus' hands and send him back in chains. He admonished him verbally to return with a message to Philemon, telling Philemon to treat him as a brother in Christ.

Onesimus had the choice to return or not, obviously. Philemon, on Onesimus' return, had the choice to treat his fellow Christian as a brother, or to reject Paul, and Christ, treat a fellow Christian brother as a slave, and burn in hell for eternity.

Did Onesimus actually do what Paul told him? If he did, did Philemon behave according to the Christian principle Paul laid out? We have no way of knowing.

Thank You.

I think slavery in the United States was different then in the Bible. THose poeople I have read sold themselves into slavery.

But as you point out capturing men and enslaving them was forbidden.

Maybe you can expand on this at some point if you so desire.

A K A Stone  posted on  2015-07-12   21:31:48 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#9. To: Vicomte13, nativist nationalist, A K A Stone, Lincoln shot for not freeing slaves in the North (#1)

Slavers deserve death.

Lincoln was shot (April 14th, 1865) before freeing the slaves in New Hampshire, New Jersey, Delaware and Kentucky. I'm happy about that, are you too? He was in a big hurry to free the slaves in the South, but not the North.

Vic would have been a good defense attorney for John Wilkes Booth.... Lincoln deserved to be shot, because he had slaves!


By December 1864, the Lincoln plan abolishing slavery had been enacted in Louisiana.[32][33] However, in Delaware[34] and Kentucky,[35] Slavery continued to be legal until December 18, 1865, when the Thirteenth Amendment went into effect.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ema...ion_Proclamation#Coverage


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_the_United_States#Northern_abolition

Connecticut did not completely abolish slavery until 1848, and slavery was not completely lifted in New Hampshire and New Jersey until the nationwide emancipation in 1865.

Hondo68  posted on  2015-07-12   21:48:12 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#10. To: nativist nationalist (#0)

The left wing globalist billionaires

But they are the brainworks of the farm. Don't they deserve all the milk and apples?

VxH  posted on  2015-07-13   8:45:24 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#11. To: Justified (#6)

Let's nuke the whole world. Every benefited and harmed by slavery. Everyone knows and ignores the truth.

God already has that in hand: we all die for our sins. We all have sins, and therefore we all die, every last stinking one of us.

The question is whether or not, after we've died and reawoken, we have a bright future ahead of us, or a grim one.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-07-13   12:15:33 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#12. To: Justified (#7)

Btw I think those that enslave others should be enslaved themselves.

It would be just.

The answer is that nobody enslaves anybody.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-07-13   12:16:25 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#13. To: hondo68 (#9)

Lincoln had slaves? Who knew?

Let's get to the bottom line here, Hondo -

(1) Black slavery in America was particularly evil, both because of the nature of the slavery, and because it was wholly done by alleged Christians, and sanctioned and defended by Christian authorities under Christian pretexts. Black slavery in America was ENTIRELY conducted by Christians, and was morally indefensible from the very beginning.

(2) By the end of the slave trade in the early 1800s, black slaves in America were Christians. It is unspeakably evil under the law of God for people of God to hold other people of God in slavery for life.

(3) Average black American DNA tests out as about 30% European. This is because of generations of rape of black slave women by their white make masters. This is a scientific fact that cannot be evaded. Wholesale rape on a was a feature of American slavery that made it particularly heinous.

(4) In the Torah God explicitly forbade men from defending their own sins by arguing the sins of others. That slavery existed all over the world, in various forms, at various times, is no excuse for American slavery.

Quick, which is worse: American Slavery, or gay marriage?

Quick, which is worse: Social Security taxation or American Slavery?

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-07-13   13:02:54 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#14. To: Vicomte13, hondo68 (#13)

Let's get to the bottom line here, Hondo -

(1) Black slavery in America was particularly evil, both because of the nature of the slavery, and because it was wholly done by alleged Christians, and sanctioned and defended by Christian authorities under Christian pretexts. Black slavery in America was ENTIRELY conducted by Christians, and was morally indefensible from the very beginning.

All this evil was supposedly "wholly done" by "alleged Christians." Under "Christian pretexts."

Seems to be a lot of "alleging," justifying, indicting AND impugning in the name of so-called "Christianity." That's awfully convenient. Truth apparently is relative to the "truth"-teller or historical revisionism. Slave-traders were MERCHANTS. On both sides of the Atlantic. If any claimed to be "Christian," to whom were they lying?

In any case, I suggest you conduct a lot more research on the *entire* matter of "slavery." And the definition of "Christian."

(2) By the end of the slave trade in the early 1800s, black slaves in America were Christians. It is unspeakably evil under the law of God for people of God to hold other people of God in slavery for life.

Yes, and yes. This phenomena is not so much an indictment of America, OR the South, OR Christians, but of man's inhumanity of man, fallibility, and moral relativity.

(3) Average black American DNA tests out as about 30% European. This is because of generations of rape of black slave women by their white make masters. This is a scientific fact that cannot be evaded. Wholesale rape on a was a feature of American slavery that made it particularly heinous. And your source of this statistic IS???:

"Wholesale" rape"?? Conducted or endorsed by whom? The entire South? The "Christian" South? "Christian" America? Western Europe?

Relative to history, Slavery in America was BRIEF. The reason it was brief was that Christian conscience won the day.

Here's a bit of interesting trivia: ALL mankind in EVERY war, in EVERY civilization (including the Papal Era of over a thousand years) has intermingled their DNA with that of their conquered areas. The conquered became their slaves, virtual slaves, and subjects. In the name of whomever they said was their "right," "God," or prerogative. Exactly WHO are you indicting in this case of yours? And *what* are you assuming is defended?

(4) In the Torah God explicitly forbade men from defending their own sins by arguing the sins of others. That slavery existed all over the world, in various forms, at various times, is no excuse for American slavery.

You've really crossing the line here. This is NOT a matter of advocating, justifying, or arguing FOR the sins of others, but a matter of reminding people like you of context. And frankly, it is the morality and law in the Holy Bible and NOT the Torah that I use as THE authority of God's word....which also forbids judging an entire race, religious sect, or creed based on the acts of a relative few 200 years ago....while convenient ignoring the coincidental amends and repentance.

Quick, which is worse: American Slavery, or gay marriage?

Quick, which is worse: Social Security taxation or American Slavery?

Why must contemplating your trap-questions be a matter of a snap-decision?

QUICK -- which act makes a mockery of one of God's Holy Sacraments? American slavery (btw, one of the most "humane" cases slavery in the history of mankind), OR American-government sanctioned "gay" marriage and the coercion to intimidate and threaten Christian Military Chaplains into performing the ceremony?

QUICK -- which is worse? Stealing and confiscating American wealth through taxation to pay for abortion and its advocacy, OR the "American"-style slavery practiced by a vast minority for all of 89 years?

Liberator  posted on  2015-07-13   15:50:34 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#15. To: Vicomte13, Justified (#12)

(Btw I think those that enslave others should be enslaved themselves.)

It would be just.

Two wrongs don't make it right....or "just."

Liberator  posted on  2015-07-13   15:52:07 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#16. To: A K A Stone, Vicomte13 (#8)

I think slavery in the United States was different then in the Bible.

The Bible speaks to indentured servitude for finite period of time as Vic well knows.

With respect to "slavery," throughout history, there have been far-ranging degrees of duration practiced by ALL civilizations and brutality -- as well as degrees of compassion. In the context of "slavery," American style "slavery" was fairly humane, relatively speaking.

All that said, WHY are we STILL re-hashing America slavery?? ANSWER: Because some of you have allowed yourselves to embrace feelings of collective guilt and obsession as a matter of a media/political manipulation.

Liberator  posted on  2015-07-13   16:02:33 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#17. To: nativist nationalist (#0)

The left wing globalist billionaires pushing Obamatrade are the sameones who like to get all preachy about the confederate flag. They make a big deal about slavery 150 years ago; while they reap some of the profits from slavery happening today.

NAILED.

And SOMEHOW, funny how an issue like this winds up re-indicting the American South of the Civil War?

NO COINCIDENCE. I'm sick of these same slavery/privilege/Confederacy/Evil Whitey/evil Po-Po/economic equality! Leftist-homofascist propaganda memes that are hammered day in and out.

Liberator  posted on  2015-07-13   16:07:27 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#18. To: Liberator (#14) (Edited)

QUICK -- which act makes a mockery of one of God's Holy Sacraments? American slavery (btw, one of the most "humane" cases slavery in the history of mankind), OR American-government sanctioned "gay" marriage and the coercion to intimidate and threaten Christian Military Chaplains into performing the ceremony?

QUICK -- which is worse? Stealing and confiscating American wealth through taxation to pay for abortion and its advocacy, OR the "American"-style slavery practiced by a vast minority for all of 89 years?

Question 1: Gay Marriage makes a mockery of the sacrament of marriage (assuming that the Catholic definition of "sacrament" has a real meaning outside of Catholic theology. American slavery was based on the permanent threat of death and torture, and included systematic rape for generation after generation. Gay marriage makes a mockery of a sacrament, and thereby defies God. Slavery reposes on murder, bloodshed and rape, and thereby defies God. Gay marriage and slavery both lead to the Lake of Fire. Which is worse? All of it.

Question 2: Taxation is not theft. Abortion is murder. Slavery is based on bloodshed and murder. So, slavery is far worse than taxation. Taxation is not a sin. Slavery is a mortal sin.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-07-13   16:22:10 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#19. To: Vicomte13, A K A Stone, Justified, Liberator (#13)

The Yankee slavemaster crackas didn't get serious about freeing their slaves, until Lincoln's head was blown off.

Then, they began to give a damn.

Hondo68  posted on  2015-07-13   16:34:25 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#20. To: Liberator (#14)

Here's a bit of interesting trivia: ALL mankind in EVERY war, in EVERY civilization (including the Papal Era of over a thousand years) has intermingled their DNA with that of their conquered areas. The conquered became their slaves, virtual slaves, and subjects. In the name of whomever they said was their "right," "God," or prerogative. Exactly WHO are you indicting in this case of yours?

Every conqueror. Every killer. Every invader. Every oppressor. Every slaver. Everybody who took up arms against his fellow man to secure an advantage.

God never authorized men to kill other men. Not to gain land. Not to gain power. Not to establish systems.

Men can shed other men's blood to administer justice against those men who had shed blood. And men can shed other men's blood in defense of themselves and others.

So, the defender against an invasion can kill, but every soldier in the invading army who kills is a murderer. The victim of an attack can kill in self-defence, but the attacker is a murderer or attempted murderer.

God gave vanishingly small grounds under which men could use force on other men, and the men who initiate the use of force are the killers. The men who oppose them by force are justiciars and defenders.

So, when the Germans invaded Poland, every German soldier who killed a Pole was a murderer, all of their commanders who ordered it were murderers. Every cop whom the Germans sent in to police and dominate by force was a potential murderer, and every one of them who shot a Pole, a man under oppression, was a murderer.

But the Poles who shot the Germans coming to kill them were not murderers.

If they all died then, at judgment, every German who shot and killed a Pole was heading into the Lake of Fire, damned. But the Poles who killed the Germans attacking them did not bear bloodguilt.

In the Warsaw ghetto, the oppressed rose violently against their oppressors, who were killing and starving them. Every German who shot a revolter to save his own life was NOT truly acting in self-defense, for his very presence there, enforcing death, was an attack, so, every German soldier who shot a Pole DEFENDING himself against the Polish uprising was STILL a murderer, and the Poles who rose against the Germans were STILL rising in their own defense.

It is not simply a matter of who initiates a particular act, but who initiated the chain of acts.

Cain was given a mark so that others would not kill him, but no killer since has been given that mark of protection.

When your country commands you to go and kill other people as an invader, if you actually go do it, and you kill, you are a murderer doomed to hell. And if you don't REALIZE that, because you made up a set of religious and theological principles that said it was ok, you are no different from an Assyrian or Caananite, Egyptian or Philistine, who ALSO justified what they did based on self-interested fantasy.

THAT is whom I am indicting: everybody who thinks their "duty" to their nation or secular ideals or power structure exceeds their duty to not kill people.

The cop who intervenes to save a life and saves a life by killing another is justified. But the cop who intervenes because he's a cop and all shall bow, who then kills an innocent unarmed man because the cop overreacted, when no life is being saved - that cop is a murderer who has damned himself.

The only way back to salvation for the cop or soldier who has killed unjustly and who is therefore damned as a murderer is repentance. But to REPENT, you have to ADMIT WHAT YOU DID WAS WRONG. You cannot stand and try to justify it because "country!" and "duty!" If your duty made you a murderer, you had a duty to God to shirk you duty to state and law and lesser oaths. Jesus said not to take oaths, so if you took some oath to some sovereign, you are a fool already, having disregarded Christ.

If, then, to fulfill this foolish illicit oath, you go out and break God's commandment against killing because "orders", then you had better be wise enough to recognize that the oath was foolish, and that the obedience to orders and the act doomed you, repent all of it, admit you were wrong to have taken the oath, and to have placed loyalty and obedience to secular country, secular law, and secular command over the absolute law of God which prohibited you from killing.

Then, with true repentance, admitting you were totally wrong - THEN your salvation is possible. But the German soldier who invaded Poland, Denmark, Holland, France and then Russia, who was part of an attacking war machine, who killed and killed again, under orders, who survived the war, and who thinks himself dutiful and good because he obeyed orders, that man is a fool who is doomed and damned. He obeyed the Devil's orders to kill, and is not repentant, because he thinks that his allegiance to oaths made to Satan's servants will save him! To save himself damnation for his murders - for that is all that all of his killings were in the service of his evil cause - he MUST admit that he was wrong to have fought FOR this evil, and that the killings he did were murders. Like Paul, he must confess himself to be a wicked killer in an evil cause, and to beg God for forgiveness. He SHOULD HAVE betrayed his state and attacked his own government and its officials, for THEY were the ones who deserved death for unleashing murder. Or he should have fled. Instead he obeyed, and fought. The PROUD German who went to his death still PROUD of his service to Satan, of the medals he earned slaying people on various fronts, HE went to Hell. For there is no salvation for murderers without repentance.

Now consider the cause of those who fought for the principle of slavery. They were like our German.

And consider what you do to yourself, how you blind yourself to the truth of things by trying to defend people who fought for the right to be unmolested in their enslavement of other people.

The REASON it is so important is that it exposes idolatry in your mind: idolatry to your nation, excessive loyalty to your ancestors, your laws, your customs, your founders - to men, to leaders. You exalt that which was evil. And you think it good, and yourself good, for standing up for it!

The importance does not lie in what happened in the past, but in what is happening in your mind, now, as you twist and turn to justify a rebellion that was over slavery - first and foremost - a death penalty offense before God - or over taxation - killing to avoid rendering unto Caesar. Any way you turn, the Southern cause of KILLING to bring about a political order in which they dominated was against the law of God. And yet you fight intellectually for the alleged "honor" of men who fought for Satan, because it was "their homes". It was not their homes. Their homes were in the hazard because they revolted against the authorities over slavery, or over taxation - either way. The Germans in 1945 who were "defending" their homes were not defenders. They were men resisting the JUSTICE due to their evil nation for having committed mass murder all over Europe. The right thing for the German to have done in 1945 was to immediately repent and surrender. Instead, he fought to the death. The Allied force invading his country was not the same as he was invading other countries, for the Allied soldier was coming to end the spree of murderers. He was enforcing the penalty for killing. Two soldiers on a battlefield do not stand on even grounds. Often, one side is in the right before God, and the other are the initiators, the killers.

In our day and age, here and now, it is CRUCIAL to understand this, as our evil nation sends forces out to attack nation after nation, on flimsy pretexts. It is difficult to see things clearly in the here and now.

To instruct us, history is a textbook, a guide. We read of the wars in the Bible, and God shows us clearly who was in the right. And then we look at our own history and apply those principles, of God, not the fallible and evil principles of men, and it SHOULD BE blindingly obvious that the Southern rebellion was evil and in the wrong, because of the alleged causes for which it was fought.

God never authorized men to kill other men to avoid taxes. God said to pay the taxes, even to oppressors. God said that money is not important, and certainly not important enough to kill men over.

God never authorized men to make slaves or to kill to protect ones ownership of slaves.

So what are we left with? "I don't like the government!" So what? God never authorized men to kill over that. He only authorized men to kill to defend, or to enforce justice, nothing more than that.

It is important to see the right and wrong, the hand of God, in play in the Civil War, to recognize that NEITHER side's political cause was right, because neither case was predicated on a moral principle upheld by God. God used an evil and stupid war to achieve a purpose: freeing slaves and punishing the nation that had enslaved them.

It is important to see this in this ancient war, because if one CANNOT see it, then one cannot possibly have the clarity of vision to understand what to do in the modern circumstances.

You call yourself Liberator. In what sense? You justify the cause of the slavers. You say it was not about slavery. What was it, then? Taxes? God rejects a call to violence over taxes. You call taxes theft. God tells you to pay them, even to Caesar. Paul - if you want to give his words weight - if Jesus isn't enough for you - tells you that the authorities are appointed by God. Tax revolts are violent opposition to God's own authorities.

You don't like taxes. Nobody ever has. So you try to find a justification in Christ and God the Father's law to oppose them. There are justifications, perhaps, to morally oppose the taxes we have - that they are unfair is true. But where does God authorize the killing of men for unfairness? He does not.

It all matters, because you must exercise your mind in the historical examples in order to be able to properly discern what to do in the present.

Defending the Confederates, or trying to mitigate the evil of German soldiers or slavers, is exactly the wrong track. If you cannot see the right way in long-past wars, how will you see clearly in the present?

That's why this all matters.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-07-13   17:09:53 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#21. To: hondo68 (#19)

The Yankee slavemaster crackas didn't get serious about freeing their slaves, until Lincoln's head was blown off.

Then, they began to give a damn.

They were evil men. All slaveowners are evil men. All killers and oppressors are evil.

If they repent of the evil, they might be saved. Without repentance, there is no forgiveness.

One does not allege the evils of another as an excuse for one's own.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-07-13   17:11:35 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#22. To: Vicomte13 (#20)

But the Poles who shot the Germans coming to kill them were not murderers.

Most Orthodox believe that to shed blood in war - even in defense is a grave sin. I think penance is 3 years withholding of the Eucharist.

St. Paul talks about receiving the Eucharist unworthily (1 Cor 11:27-32, RSV):

Quote

27 Whoever, therefore, eats the bread or drinks the cup of the Lord in an unworthy manner will be guilty of profaning the body and blood of the Lord. 28 Let a man examine himself, and so eat of the bread and drink of the cup. 29 For any one who eats and drinks without discerning the body eats and drinks judgment upon himself. 30 That is why many of you are weak and ill, and some have died. 31 But if we judged ourselves truly, we should not be judged. 32 But when we are judged by the Lord, we are chastened[d] so that we may not be condemned along with the world.

http://www.incommunion.org/2011/03/31/orthodox-perspectives-on-peace-war-and-violence/

Orthodox canon law has maintained, however, the recognition of the spiritual gravity of taking life in war. St Basil the Great recommended that those who kill in war should abstain from taking communion for three years. Soldiers were not sanctioned with nearly the same severity as murderers, but were given time to repair the damage done to their souls by killing through a period of repentance before communing. This canon may never have been applied strictly, and clearly has often been ignored in the practice of the church. Still, it stands as a reminder that war is not unambiguously good; the taking of the life of a fellow human being is a grave matter that threatens to impair one’s relationship with the Lord, the church and one’s neighbours.

Pericles  posted on  2015-07-13   17:15:15 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#23. To: Vicomte13 (#20)

You call yourself Liberator. In what sense?

You justify the cause of the slavers.

My moniker is in honor of the B-24 Liberator.

That said, you lie when you claim I've "justified the cause of slavers." And WHO has justified the notion that "God authorize the killing of men for unfairness?"? Not me. Stop creating strawmen.

You also seem to find total justification of taxation by the state. What of in the case of subsidizing baby murder/abortion?

Defending the Confederates, or trying to mitigate the evil of German soldiers or slavers, is exactly the wrong track. If you cannot see the right way in long-past wars, how will you see clearly in the present? That's why this all matters.

Again, you've merely succeeded in creating further strawmen.

Explaining the context of history is NOT the same as justification, advocacy, or endorsement of slavery. Moreover, I do not need a lecture on the evils hearts on mankind, the ethics of self defense, and the white-guilting you've seemed to have embraced with open arms.

Liberator  posted on  2015-07-13   17:24:31 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#24. To: Pericles (#22)

Yes. We should recall that David, YHWH's beloved, was specifically, and explicitly, denied the right, by God, to build the Temple, because David had been a man of blood, had killed so many in war. God did not permit that his beloved shepherd king be the one to build the house for him BECAUSE HE WAS A WARRIOR. And this even though those wars were mostly sanctioned by God, and had favorable outcomes because of the presence of God.

God gave David the victory, and loved him, and forgave much - and it is David's name who is mentioned so prominently in the discussions of the genealogy of Jesus. But it was Solomon to whom the task of building the Temple was actually given. David was prohibited from doing it by God because of all of the blood he had shed.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-07-13   18:19:12 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


#25. To: Liberator (#23)

You also seem to find total justification of taxation by the state. What of in the case of subsidizing baby murder/abortion?

Jesus told the Jews to pay taxes to a Roman state that crucified slaves and men, and took women as sex slaves by the tens of millions, and practiced infanticide and endless war against neighbors. Rome was a recklessly evil state. Tiberias Caesar, THE Caesar to whom Jesus said to render taxes, dwelt in utter depravity on the island of Capri. He had nursing babies brought to him and put to his genitals to suckle on him, or so says his contemporary historian.

THE Caesar of Jesus' commandment was an utterly depraved murderer, drowning in sin, and waging bloody war against many. And yet Jesus told the Jews, who were puffed up with righteousness about not paying taxes to their pagan conquerors, to pay Caesar's coin to Caesar.

Although Jesus did not make it plain right there, in the bulk of what he said his reasoning was completely plain, and you would do well to take note of it, because it touches on your blindest of blind spots regarding God: Jesus had a total disregard for money.

He disregarded it, and he commanded those who followed him to disregard it. He told them not to store it up. He told them to give it all away to the poor and ill, to not expect to be paid back.

But if I do that, I will have nothing! says the worldly man for whom money is important. Jesus says no. Jesus says that if you do as he says and TRUST GOD, God will provide EVERYTHING. Everything you need. God knows what you need.

One of the WAYS that God provides his people what they need is THROUGH the money given by others of their people.

The Apostles were not communists, but they lived communally. Those who had property, gave what they had of their excess, and those who needed, took what they needed from their need. Those words, which Marx paraphrased, as in the very Acts of the Apostles.

The power of Christianity, its particular reach across the Empire of wicked Caesars, to the poor and slave, was that God directly healed, and provided food, and sustenance, to the poor along with forgiveness for sins and hope.

The material means for this was found in Christians giving their wealth to other Christians, joyously, and trusting in God. For this trust, they became poor - but they were rich! And they were tortured and killed - and obtained SALVATION.

Jesus placed no stock at all in money. He told people to give it away and forgive offenses.

And THEREFORE, when confronted with Jews, in the Temple, clamoring about a tribute to Caesar, what Jesus said fits like a glove. To refuse to pay Caesar taxes was to engage in a tax revolt, which the Romans would CERTAINLY put down, ruthlessly, in blood. And over WHAT? Over money, which was NOTHING to Christ, and which IS nothing to Christ's followers. To withhold taxes to Caesar was to die FOR NOTHING. So, give the coin to Caesar and have done with it.

In the Old Testament, we see the money system God laid out: everybody was GIVEN a farm, for free, forever to remain in the family, without obligation. It could never be taken: not for debt, not for taxes, not even in eminent domain. It could be rented out, but the lease always expired at the Jubilee.

God gave every man a direct, fixed piece of land, his place to put his tent, his home, without ANY legal way to remove that security. The security God gave was absolute, for housing, and God did not allow an exception for the gravest matter of state. No eminent domain, no law power to take land if really needed. God was in charge, and it would never REALLY be "needed" to take the land from the families in successive generations.

And then, God gave a law of taxes that amounted to a percentage of the produce of the land. This was to feed the clergy and the poor. And God gave a general law of money transactions: fair prices, no interest on loans, debt forgiveness every seven years, and the wiping out of all obligations, and freeing slaves, freeing all from all of their debts and obligations and punishments, in the 50th year.

THAT is God's law. When men look at that, they say it can't work, they doubt. And THAT is the lack of faith, for faith means TRUST.

God said that every seventh year farmers could plant nothing. They could only pick what grew of its own. And farmers were not permitted to glean their land. Harvest was a once-pass through. Whatever fell, or matured later, was to be left in the field. The poor had the right to enter into all farmland and take all of that that was left, the gleanings. Thus, the farm and its crops were NOT absolutely the property of the farmer. Only the first picking was. The gleanings, and all of the late bloom, was the property of the poor, who had the right to enter, to take and to eat - but NOT the right to collect and walk away and sell excess. Once again, God promised to PROVIDE, but he barred making an enterprise out of that which was given by him for free.

Hebrews could not be made slaves at all, ever. And foreign slaves bought with money or captured in war had to be released on conversion to God. And all slaves had to be released in the Jubilee. And one more thing: if a slave escaped and said his master was cruel, the man to whom the slave escaped was forbidden by God's law to return him. Slaves had SANCTUARY from return and punishment if they fled.

If a man wanted to take a female captive or slave for sex, she became his WIFE, with FULL RIGHTS of succession in her children, and the right to provisions, and specifically the right to sex so that she could produce heirs, who would share in the land.

God's law is very, very confining. Southern slavery had none of those features. In fact, Southern slavery pointedly suppressed virtually every feature of God's law.

God's law of slavery was meant to provide strong incentives for the conversion to God, of captives, who would recognize God as their liberator, to turn captive Gentiles into Hebrews, to prevent the abuses of weak and captive people, to completely prevent reducing people to slavery because of debt - in fact, to wipe out all debt periodically and free everybody and return all to the land. And to completely protect women. Have sex with a virgin, she is your wife, and you can never divorce her. Meaning that a man was financially responsible to every woman he deflowered, for life, with no means of escape - and she had the ongoing right to sex, and to children.

God's law turns the very notion of the importance of money, and power, on its side. Accumulated money cannot buy you land - God gives a piece of that free, as a birthright, that is unalienable.

God prohibits the charging of interest to fellow Hebrews. Foreigners? Yes, they may be charged interest, but God forbade Hebrews from denying loans to their needy brethren. The loan had to be provided, interest free. The whole system God designed was to prevent the accumulation of money power, and to make sure that every follower of God had a home that was hid, farmland that was his, enough food for himself and all of his children, and that even the most foolish man of God could only be reduced to paid service for six years, and his children - regardless of how irresponsible he was - would always get the land back.

THAT was God's law for his people.

Look at how Jesus transformed that for the Gentiles, and how the Apostles actually lived that way.

So, here you are, in an American state. It's an evil, murderous, licentious state: 2 million abortions a year, wars of choice, gay marriages. America is a nest of vipers and sin, a pagan nation that will be destroyed. We are just sojourners here.

This vicious state, this Caesar, imposes taxes. Those taxes pay for the wars, and abortions, and other things that are somewhat better. What is the Christian to do?

Easy. Pay the taxes, for money is nothing, and men are never authorized by God to kill over money. (This is why the Founding Fathers were killers in sin: "Taxation without Representation" may well be tyranny, but God never authorized men to kill over tyranny. Caesar's tyranny was much worse, and Jesus told the Jews - and the Founders - to pay those taxes. It is because men do not trust God - which is to say that they do not have faith in God, that God will do as Jesus promised and provide - that men give a value to money that Jesus rejected explicitly, and are willing to KILL rather than give up money.

Pay your taxes and don't worry about it. God will hold the abortionists and the Caesar's liable for the killings. He will hold YOU liable if you refuse to pay your taxes. And if you go kill others in a tax revolt, to not pay for abortion, he will thrown you into the flames as a killer. God never authorized men to kill over mere money. The opposite: he said to not charge interest, and to loan it out to any of the faithful who ask. How much would really be left to give away at all were men to follow that course?

So, do I find "total justification" of taxation by the state? Of course not! The state spends the money killing people in evil wars, paying for abortions, enslaving millions in prisons over trivial affairs, engaging in terrible corruption and abuse. The American state is thoroughly evil, like ancient Rome. Indeed, it engages in all of the same sins: unjust wars, mass murders, enslavement over things that ought not be serious crimes. Social Welfare mitigates some of the evil, often for very impure reasons. I do not justify this state of ours at all, in any way.

Neither did Jesus. Paul seems to have, but Paul can be difficult to understand. Are leaders appointed by God? Yes. But Nebuchadnezzar, Sennacherib, Pharaoh and the Caesars who destroyed Jerusalem were also appointed by God. God says flatly that he sends both good and evil upon those who deserve it.

YOU and I are not accountable for our state. We are not accountable for what the evil captains of our state do. We are only accountable for what WE do. So, if we choose to throw ourselves into the service to the state, to earn our keep that way, the state is evil and cannot absolve us from sins we commit serving the state. If we choose to live by the sword, it is our own choice to expose ourselves to committing terrible sin, and to peril. If we then die by the sword and, having ourselves killed for coin in the mercenary service of an evil state, we must not be surprised when we awaken in the fire. We have brought it on ourselves by choosing to ally with evil and to commit sin.

But paying taxes to the evil state is not only no sin, it is a commandment of Christ. For money is not important, but the desire to hold onto it, to deprive the state of it and keep it for ourselves, is covetousness and confidence in money that Christ rejects.

God will provide. Pay the taxes. It enables the evil to dig for themselves a fiery tomb they so richly deserve, and that God will not spare to provide.

Pay the taxes and be praised by God for your obedience.

And then give up luxury and vice and excess. Live modestly. If you are a debtor, use all of your excess to pay your debt, for in truth you have no excess, you are indentured for debt. Do not spend excess on luxury, and do not think yourself virtuous giving it away to some "charitable organization" or "church" to maintain structures and salaries of people whom God never authorized. No. That money is not even yours, yet: you are indentured to debt. FIRST you must eliminate your indenture, to be free of debt. THEN, only then, is what you earn yours. And then continue to live modestly, and take the rest of your excess, and use it to directly aid other Christians and poor, and destitute.

Do not trouble yourself that it is "inefficient" to give directly to those who need it, to loan without interest and then to forgive whatever is unpaid, in the seventh year. The tax code will let you take a deduction if you give to various "designated" charities, but do not allow those who pay themselves high salaries to stand as priests over giving, using the money you give in ways tightly monitored by the state that gives them, and you, tax breaks.

Do not let your right hand know what your left is doing. Instead, trust God. Give your excess away, as interest free loans. Free your other struggling Christians. Build up a mighty fist of men and women, free and helping each other.

Trust God to provide, and cease to dwell on what the state does with lucre. It is not your liability. If you can change it politically, do so, but do not resist the tax and refuse to pay it, for to do so is to defy Christ.

Vicomte13  posted on  2015-07-13   19:12:21 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  


TopPage UpFull ThreadPage DownBottom/Latest

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Mail]  [Sign-in]  [Setup]  [Help]  [Register] 

Please report web page problems, questions and comments to webmaster@libertysflame.com