why are you an atheist?

All it would take is some rational thought- you don't have to follow any religion for that, in fact, you might be better off if you don't.

By the way, any making statements indicating that a people who don't agree with you are less-evolved and then going after a person's nationality who disagrees with you...... sounds like the same British (or UK) arrogance that led to the oppression of the Indian people and various others. Make sure you're standing on solid ground before you talk like that.....

1. Good point, but the Christian managed to stop it. Still, you're right, i'm wrong.

2. That's not too bad. You could get new skin. It's logic that helps us here determine what they're like. If they ate bats, that would be Ok. But if they barbarically kill bats for sport, then that would be a bit worse. If they don't think like this, then they're not evolved. England isn't evolved in this aspect. Of course, I may be wrong, but then you should point that out to me. Don't tell me not to hate acts of evil.

Fox hunting? That's killing for sport.....

And people as a whole stop things because whole people allowed them to go on.

Sorry did you agree with my statement that England is wrong, and confuse me? Explain part two.

One person can point out that something is wrong (though someone from the UK isn't responsible for the ending of slavery in the US), but it takes a whole group of people (most if not all) to put a stop to something they disagree with.

Yup, and the Christian pursuaded people to stop. What's your problem?

Sorry if my speaking is degrading, but I'm an hour foward and very tired.

Originally posted by Ytaker
Yup, and the Christian pursuaded people to stop. What's your problem?

Who was this first person, the Christian that convinced everyone it was bad, then?

You need to back up your claims if you want to be taken seriously.

Wilberforce i think. I'll return tommorow with more infomation.

One person didn't persuade them to stop. One person alone can't stop a country from doing the wrong thing.

Okay, so you have a name. Now where's your proof that he was the FIRST person to say that slavery was wrong and convince other people of this?

Did i say that? He was the first person to stop it.

We never managed to convince a majority of the South that slavery was wrong; if we had, the Civil War wouldn't have happened.

I think the Quakers were preaching against slavery before Wilberforce. Of course, they were Christians, too.

As long as slavery has existed people have been against it and trying to stop it! And guess what, like I already said, slavery has been around a lot longer than Christianity!

I think he finished in the nineteenth century, about 1830, although he got the act in, in 1810 ish.

But we're fighting it. We're winning the war.

He made it official. Slavery is bad from 1810 ish. Night.

It still exists today, so it seems this guy wasn't entirely successful......

Again, its a lot of people over time, not just one person. Maybe if you're talking about what happened in the UK.

In many ways, Wilburforce was a great anti-slavery campaigner. But he didn't want to immediately free Britians's slaves, because he didn't think they were ready for freedom: "It would be wrong to emancipate (the slaves). To grant freedom to them immediately, would be to insure not only their masters' ruin, but their own. They must (first) be trained and educated for freedom."

It would be silly to give Wilburforce sole credit for anything. It was Lord Grenville who got Wilburforce's bill (which did not free slaves, it simply made it illegal for British ships to transport them) through the House of Lords, for example. By the time Wilburforce came into things, there was already a lot of anti-slavery sentimant going around.