Definitions must be clearly laid out or arguments have no meaning. Without clearly defining slavery arguments about "slave labor" are fundamentally incoherent.
Karl Marx's Analysis of Religion
http://atheism.about.com/od/philosophyofreligion/a/marx_4.htmAccording to Karl Marx, religion is like other social institutions in that it is dependent upon the material and economic realities in a given society. It has no independent history; instead it is the creature of productive forces. As Marx wrote, The religious world is but the reflex of the real world.
According to Marx, religion can only be understood in relation to other social systems and the economic structures of society.
In fact, religion is only dependent upon economics, nothing else so much so that the actual religious doctrines are almost irrelevant. This is a functionalist interpretation of religion: understanding religion is dependent upon what social purpose religion itself serves, not the content of its beliefs.
Marxs opinion is that religion is an illusion that provides reasons and excuses to keep society functioning just as it is. Much as capitalism takes our productive labor and alienates us from its value, religion takes our highest ideals and aspirations and alienates us from them, projecting them onto an alien and unknowable being called a god.
...
We are in a war for our survival. And so I don't want to hear this bullshit about how noble we are and how we eliminated slavery.
Please read also my prior post with quotes from comments from others. White men are in a war now. Married white women who have good sense are on the side of white men in this war.
All the noble ideological social justice crap is just Soros manipulation trying to undermine our ability to fight. You regurgitating that slavery lie is akin to when you used to regurgitate the man-made global warming lie.
Religion is off topic. You are inventing a strawman afaics to support that you are still mindcontrolled by Soros ostensibly from your time in the academic setting. You seem to really believe that society has made great moral accomplishments. If anything will end slavery, it will be technology not morals.
...
Just to correct a few errors above I have said nothing at all about racism on this forum. I have said very little on global warming highlighting on more than one occasion my general lack of interest in that debate. Claiming I lied about slavery is simply untrue. You appear unwilling to actually define slavery. Not doing so may provide a degree of rhetorical flexibility, but it does so at the great cost making any discussion of the topic nonsensical. I would appreciate it if you would not mischaracterise my positions.
Humanity has made moral accomplishments over the last several thousand years. Whether one views these as great strides or marginal improvements depends I suppose on your frame of reference.
I noticed you did not answer my question above. That is ok I will let the matter rest. For those who agree with Marx's comments on religion l have a follow up query.
Communism Killed 94 Million in the 20th century.
http://reason.com/blog/2013/03/13/communism-killed-94m-in-20th-centurymore people died as a result of communism than from homicide (58 million) and genocide (30 million) put together. The combined death tolls of WWI (37 million) and WWII (66 million) exceed communism's total by only 9 million
Once you choose to embrace a major principle of Marxism (perhaps the
core principle) of Marxism what gives you confidence your "solution" will turn out any better?
Voltaire [1768], "Response to the author of the book, The Three Impostors"
"My lodging is filled with lizards and rats;
But the architect exists, and anyone who denies it
Is touched with madness under the guise of wisdom.
Consult Zoroaster, and Minos, and Solon,
And the martyr Socrates, and the great Cicero:
They all adored a master, a judge, a father.
This sublime system is necessary to man.
It is the sacred tie that binds society,
The first foundation of holy equity,
The bridle to the wicked, the hope of the just.
If the heavens, stripped of his noble imprint,
Could ever cease to attest to his being,
If God did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him.
Let the wise man announce him and kings fear him.
Kings, if you oppress me, if your eminencies disdain
The tears of the innocent that you cause to flow,
My avenger is in the heavens: learn to tremble.
Such, at least, is the fruit of a useful creed.
But you, faulty logician, whose sad foolishness
Dares to reassure them in the path of crime,
What fruit do you expect to reap from your fine arguments?
Will your children be more obedient to your voice?
Your friends, at time of need, more useful and reliable?
Your wife more honest? and your new renter,
For not believing in God, will he pay you better?
Alas! let's leave intact human belief in fear and hope.
...
I see from afar that era coming, those happy days,
When philosophy, enlightening humanity,
Must lead them in peace to the feet of the common master;
Frightful fanaticism will tremble to appear there:
There will be less dogma with more virtue. "