Gay and Hindu: 19 LGBT Hindu Gods

[Technics 1210]

It does seem to be a feature of one-god cultures. European Christian states were phasing it out by the early 1800s, USA by 1865, Brazil and the Ottomans by WW1.

The Caliphates didn’t operate slave plantations over multiple generations like the Europeans and Americans. Slavery was more in terms of decades of indentured service and harems. A slave could eventually join a household and have some autonomy. But they still stole tens of millions of Europeans and Africans - including several thousand Celts from Cornwall taken by the Barbary Corsairs. President Jefferson put a stop to that by burning the Corsair ports (while still running his own plantation at Monticello including his personal African baby mamma).

Slavery a feature of one-god cultures? Where was the one-god culture when Pharoahs were whipping up slaves?

 

[Napa]

Hinduism is not really a religion. It is basically a mythology so it has no boundaries and anything can be presented as part of it.

Depends upon how you define religion and mythology.

Everything supernatural can be called mythology by those who do not believe.

A religion generally has a code of conduct, and Hinduism provides many different codes of conduct, for example based on the life of Lord Rama.

What is different about Hinduism is that it does not have one holy book and Hindus can differ significantly from each other in their beliefs and codes of conduct.

 

[Robert]

Slavery a feature of one-god cultures? Where was the one-god culture when Pharoahs were whipping up slaves?

That a polytheistic culture used slave labour does not mean that monotheistic cultures did not use them too.

 

[Technics 1210]

That a polytheistic culture used slave labour does not mean that monotheistic cultures did not use them too.

You said slavery seems to be a feature of one-god culture. Clearly it's not. Slavery existed long before Monotheism and exists in non-monothestic cultures too. This is the point.

 

[SpiritOf1903]

It does seem to be a feature of one-god cultures. European Christian states were phasing it out by the early 1800s, USA by 1865, Brazil and the Ottomans by WW1.

The Caliphates didn’t operate slave plantations over multiple generations like the Europeans and Americans. Slavery was more in terms of decades of indentured service and harems. A slave could eventually join a household and have some autonomy. But they still stole tens of millions of Europeans and Africans - including several thousand Celts from Cornwall taken by the Barbary Corsairs. President Jefferson put a stop to that by burning the Corsair ports (while still running his own plantation at Monticello including his personal African baby mamma).

Except Islam itself outlawed it in its infancy.

 

[Napa]

Except Islam itself outlawed it in its infancy.

Islam outlawed slavery?

 

[SpiritOf1903]

Islam outlawed slavery?

Erm, yeah.

 

[Robert]

Except Islam itself outlawed it in its infancy.

Curious that it went on for 1300 more years then.

 

[Cpt. Rishwat]

Slaves were also set free according to the owners desires in earlier cultures, for example in Rome.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_ancient_Rome#Emancipation

A sanction of slavery means that it was no better than whatever preceded it. So what is your point?

My point was that your links and sources once again focused almost exclusively on portraying Islamic society as brutal as opposed to those preceding it because of your selective bias given your own cultural background. That is all.

 

[SpiritOf1903]

Curious that it went on for 1300 more years then.

That Muslims practiced it doesn't reflect Islam outlawing it. Turks drink alcohol, prohibited in Islam.

 

[MenInG]

That Muslims practiced it doesn't reflect Islam outlawing it. Turks drink alcohol, prohibited in Islam.

Not all Turks drink - this is not a widespread thing.

 

[SpiritOf1903]

Not all Turks drink - this is not a widespread thing.

It's as integral to the culture as anywhere else in Europe though. Raki a staple apperitif.

 

[Napa]

My point was that your links and sources once again focused almost exclusively on portraying Islamic society as brutal as opposed to those preceding it because of your selective bias given your own cultural background. That is all.

You are running around in circles. You start by saying "the world was probably fine with incest, bestiality and paedophilia before Abrahamism. Why wouldn't it be?" thus denigrating pre-Abrahamism cultures. I gave you an example challenging this notion and you turn around and accuse me of bias.

No more replies.