Intergalactic Summit

What a poorly constructed argument.

Firstly, you posit three types of Slavery and then address only two in your argument.

Secondly, you define Mental Slavery as the indoctrination of a person into ideas that they cannot evaluate without an objective perspective - only you totally fail to notice that a person CANNOT have an objective perspective on something that is personal. Per definition such a belief is SUBJECTIVE and, when someone does change their mind on something they were taught as a child it is only because they are given new data that change their subjective position.

Thirdly, having (poorly) defined Mental Slavery you totally forget that it applies to EVERYTHING that EVERYONE is taught as a child. I can no more help believing in the Will of God and the Laws of the Prophets than you can help believing that Democracy is the only viable method of Government.

Fourthly, you define Physical Slavery as performing tasks for another, an assertion that makes Slaves of EVERY ONE OF US, from Empress to Farm Hand. We all perform tasks for another, Captain.

Fifthly, you conflate Physical and Mental Slavery, claiming that one can be the other, if the Physically Enslaved person is not aware that they have been Physically Enslaved. This, of course, means that no Slave is mentally enslaved, because ALL of them are aware of their state, why it exists and what they can do to alleiviate it. Within the Kingdom and Empire, anyway, God alone knows what a Cartel Prostitute or a Serpentis Chemist can do to improve their lot.

Sixthly and finally, you state that anyone who is Mentally Enslaved is beyond all help. We have already established that, according to your definitions, everyone other than Slaves is mentally enslaved and, therefore, we are all beyond help. Except for the Slaves, of course, who have no illusions about their condition.

On second thought, I can't work out whether you're just trying to be REALLY deep...

As I do not know you, Damsa Desirah, nor was part of the Ushra'Khan (U'K) while your corporation was part of the alliance as I was either planet side or part of another Alliance conducting operations with the Minmatar Militia; I can't retrospectively rebuke your omission that you have/had slaves whilst flying with U'K, that is for others to do.

I would have hoped that (at the time) if the council of U'K were made aware of your use of slaves that this would have been met with a stern response, but as I said, I was not part of the council during your tenure.

I do find your tenure to be at odds with the established U'K declarations of anti-slavery, and wonder why you were even part of such alliance. I assume you were part of the Minmatar Militia and wonder how you would justify fighting against slavery whilst actively using slaves yourself.

I'm unaware of the current Damu'Khonde stance on slavery, since it was established as a mirror to U'K when we were betrayed by a senior member of the executive and U'K was disbanded. Can you enlighten me on what Damu'Khonde stands for these days?

Clearly, as I'm sure many here would bleat that I have double standards, I direct the same calls to you to stop your use of slaves.

You'll have to forgive the Lady Holder for being unfamiliar with the nature of Vitoc and Vitoxin as she has little to no experience with it. I would remind you, again, that it is just not as popular in the Kingdom as it is in the Empire.

Those "slaves" were already free before you, and yes your kind, subjugated them. Simple.



I think Dilaro thagriin has fully-formed truths to base his understanding of the use of Vitoc across Amarr, you denigrate him by essentially calling him a liar when clearly his own family are testament to his understanding. How can he create propaganda when the facts are real. so its not propaganda it's the truth.

Don't bleat on that I'm asserting you or your illustrious Family are using vitoc, I'm not.

Anyway, must dash, more brass to polish.

This hound is white, therefore all hounds are white and all white things are hounds?

Oh yes, one experience gives him a fully formed understanding of prevailing conditions throughout the ENTIRE Empire? And the Kingdom, of course, is exactly the same as the Empire, so Captain Thagriin has managed to assemble a veritable continuum of expertise from a single datapoint.

In point of fact, his statements about Vitoxin and Vitoc are of roughly equal value as Lady Meiyi's statement about no Vitoxin and Vitoc. He has direct experience of one Holder that uses it and she has direct experience of one Holder that doesn't.

Sorry to say, but you're literally preaching to the the converted there my friend. By her definition the entire cluster are slaves, except for the holy favoured Ammarians. Yes she will bleat on that "some" Ammarians are slaves for not following scripture or some such tattle, but remember Amarrians have "pre-reclaimed" sperm and eggs and that their divine god sanctifies ejaculation and subsequent birth of a glorious Amarrian baby. Convenient.



I maybe incorrect, but I believe the Ushra'Khan have the only sample of Insorum, which is secured in a vault somewhere (even I as a council member don't know the location), and have been denied the use of, manufacture of or distribution of by the powers that be. It does pose a question regarding the recent escalation of Angel Cartel attacks that maybe this is what they are looking for, but that's conjecture.

Freedom is not a gift, I suppose in that much you are correct.
'Gift' makes it sound like something that you don't start with and is given on whim or as a luxury.

Freedom is a Birthright.
Every newborn soul, innocent of all actions that came before it's birth is born with the right to freedom.

If you feel otherwise then prove your belief.
on the day your child is born, give it to a holder, and demand that it be enslaved.
at birth no child can understand the word god, let alone the nuances of spirituality or divinity.
at birth, no child can understand your faith, or the written word of your god.

therefore, by ms Amaki Mai's own words, all children are born heathens, and should be enslaved until they can :



just a thought.

Actually, a child typically has plenty of legal rights. Their lives and physical well-being are usually protected by law at least as rigidly as the lives and well-being of adults.

There are usually clear and strict limits to the kinds of methods parents have the right to use when disciplining their children. Injuring your child on purpose might be grounds for battery charges. Killing your child is murder.

Even in places where slavery is nominally allowed, being a parent gives you no legal right to sell your child, as far as I'm aware.

Children are typically allowed to own property, although they aren't always allowed to manage it themselves until they come of age. Still, again, there tends to be limits to what their appointed wards can and cannot do with the property.

There are other variable rights as well - the right of inheritance tends to be quite widely practiced, though particulars vary from place to place. A right to basic education seems to be pretty common, too.

If a parent fails to observe the legal rights of his or her child, they typically run the risk of having the custody of their child taken away from them, in addition to whatever punishment they are made to suffer for their criminal acts.

All of these are legal rights that slaves do not necessarily possess. Even so, your argument still carries enough weight that parents would do well to consider its implications.

You were making a blanket statement, Captain, which was what I was replying to. You are quite correct that there are places where children's rights are not present. However, these are typically places governed at the whim of warlords or local strongmen, where the rule of law can't be said to apply in any real sense, anyway. In those places, most adults don't have any firm legal rights either, making the distinction between adult and child largely irrelevant.


Adoption is almost never a sale in a legal sense, and we are talking law, here.


It's rare enough for children to actually own significant property of their own that such agreements are rather common in the cases where they do, from what I have seen. Inherited property in particular is often protected to some extent by default, to my knowledge. Still, I accept that practices may vary, here.

I apologise that it has taken so long for me to respond, but I am honestly astounded by the level of sheer bloody minded stupidity you are showing here.

In your own words you have utterly destroyed your own argument and enforced mine, all the while claiming in your self righteous tone that you have done the opposite.

I have numbered your claims, the IGS seems to dislike numerous quotes.

1)
A child has many rights, protected, even in the amarrian empire, and i daresay in the khanid kingdom, by law.
These rights include, but are not limited to:

Healthcare
Education
Protection from abuse, both domestic and outside the home
Clothing
Emotional support

Would you deny your child these things?

2)
I still remember the day my niece decided she was a vegan. No, children are not forced to eat specific foods, unless you would condone physically restraining your child and force it to eat.

3)
While in certain situations, Ceremonies, Legal proceedings, and a large percentage of school environments, this is true, You must not have spent much time around teenagers in their free time.

4)
Ah... 'submit to education' ... i kind of expected this, but here's the thing... an education is a right, not a chore. some people squander that right, choosing instead to follow different avenues of advancement, or regretting their choice in later life, but the provision for education is granted to any and every child within the federation.

5)
You have certainly not spent time around children, teenage or younger. Most of them sleep when they are tired, and at no other time. whether they quietly read, play on the latest holo-box or sneak out for night-time forays with their friends, they rarely sleep 'at the time they are ordered to'
As for chores, yes, they do help with housework, such activities help them to learn responsibility, and are a standard part of any childhood. and yes, they recieve a weekly sum for those activities in many places, this helps them to learn the value of work, both things are intended to help them in later life.

My confusion here is how you would liken this to slavery. a slave recieves, by definition, no pay for their work, and are often abused or even killed for performing at a sub-standard during their given task. Would you condone this behaviour towards a child?

6)
I suppose you had to be at least mostly right in one of your points, even if it was the most irrelevant.
Yes, if they are lucky, a child lives with their parents, should the parents move, the child will, in general, move with them. I don't get your point here, a child cannot be sold to another, moved forcefully from it's family (unless the family is neglectful or abusive) or be forced to live in sub-standard accommodation (see: neglectful).
A slave cannot choose who it is owned by, where it lives, or report it's owner to the authorities for abusive or neglectful behaviour.

7)
Ah.. and this point. yes, at some point, a child gains more responsibility and more rights, and is thereafter referred to as an adult. The age and method of such changes varies from culture to culture, but it basically means the same thing.

However.. 'determined by their station in life' ?
When a child becomes an adult, they are free to begin to forge their place in adult society, There are very few cultures where the 'station' of a person is a function of their parent's place. of those that have such a system, the Jin-Mei caste system and the Amarrian system of slaveholding are the two that stand out the most.

8)
Let's see here. The most basic description of slavery?

The state of one bound in servitude as the property of a slaveholder or household

I've put a little emphasis there just for you.

Honestly, given your claim that childhood is the same as slavery, I sincerely hope you never breed ms Mai. No child deserves such a callous parent. Slavery indeed.