Intergalactic Summit

Hm. I think I'd disagree.

This is about the Scriptures. To the first question, the Book of Reclaiming 3:20 establishes a rather clear servitude hierarchy of God over Sefrim over Amarr over everyone else, and slavery is simply an implementation of this hierarchy as per BoR 3:21, where the term used is "serf", not "slave".

Now, the second question of the Admiral is tautological in nature due to the parenthesized requirement of "appropriateness". Rephrasing it, he could also have asked "does the use of Vitoc that facilitates successful outcomes facilitate successful outcomes", and the answer is obviously "yes". Even if interpreted more favorably, it's a question of existence, not of effectiveness: Even a single person reclaimed using Vitoc implies that Vitoc "facilitates successful outcomes vis a vis the use of slavery to Reclaim lost souls."

A more interesting question would be about the effectiveness of the Vitoc method, or even slavery, compared to other methods, but that's not in the spirit of the Book of Reclaiming. BoR is all about "bringing faith with the sword" - accept the Amarrian faith, or suffer . BoR 22:13 is actually quite explicit about how the Amarr are supposed to conquer the galaxy to reclaim it, establishing a clear correlation between the two concepts. You could go as far as to say that BoR 4:45 actually encourages genocide over other forms of convincing, but it at least encourages use of force to spread His word.

It should be noted that the Book of Reclaiming is the main, or even only, source for the aggressiveness of the Amarrian culture. All other parts of the Scriptures are much more introverted and deal with personal growth and the personal relationship of the faithful with God. At most, they encourage the faithful to surround themselves with other faithful (Book of Missions 71:21), but they do not encourage conquest or aggressiveness. They promise protection and a good life in exchange for Faith. All in all, the remaining Scriptures could be the basis for a much more mature culture than the current Amarrian one.

If I were a progressive Amarr, I'd argue that the Book of Reclaiming is obviously a heretical text, considering what a stark contrast it provides to the rest of the canonical Scriptures. Declaring it as a heretical text and excluding it from the canon would in one go remove pretty much all of the theological foundations for Amarrian atrocities in the last millennia.

Interesting how you resort to pitiful and repetitive personal insults on his intelligence (obviously far greater than yours) rather than address the actual pieces of Scripture themselves. Though I'm not sure why the man bothers using the Scripture, a book written by angry, racist bigots thousands of years ago and applying to the angry and bitter social structures of Ancient Amarr. Come now, are you serious? Scrap the Scriptures, they don't apply to today's day and age and watching people, for example, try to prove or disprove the 'righteousness' of vitoc, a drug that is FAR newer than the scriptures, is laughable, because Vitoc didn't even exist as a useable drug during that time, thus solid evidence of its morality or immorality can't be found there. Amarr needs to move forward, their barbaric scriptures are holding them back socially about 10,000 years from the rest of the cluster. It's honestly depressing.

The Scriptures are "nothing more" than countless books. If you really want to agree with everything and every author that has written something in a whole culture, you are probably doing it wrong, especially when a lot of them disagree with each other when it comes to certain ideals - and maybe Vitoc is part of them, considering the lack of clear indications in the theological roots of the Scriptures (TC).

Then concerning slavery, there is no direct statement done in the Scriptures that endorse or condone it, or prohibit it, at least in the core TC texts. As a matter of the fact it is mainly up to individual interpretations, like most of what is written here anyway.

Taking Scriptures too literally is a grave mistake. Half of something that is written is each person's unique interpretation of it. It's not your authority to declare someone as having the wrong interpretation: it's not right or wrong interpretation: it's just his interpretation. There are as many views on Scripture as there are people who read it.

Hm. How do you interpret the term "serf" in BoR 3:21? I think that's the one mainly used to argue for slavery.

So we're both stuck in the past and capable of embracing new ideas such as Vitoc?

Make up your mind!

I'd beg to differ. My handmaiden, ms. Maleto obeys me without a doubt, and I had never threatened her with Vitoxin.
I think the picture of an unhappy hordes of mistreated slaves waiting for someone to rile them up into a rebellion is the one that has more to do with propaganda holoreels than actual reality.

You don't use Vitoxin or Vitoc to keep her in line. Just every other drug known to man, god, or nature.

A laughably false comparison. Federation law and the punishments therein are consistently applied with due process. Federal laws are designed to be applied equally to all those who agree to be bound by the responsibilities inherent in taking residence in the Federation. Vitoc is a method used to coerce obedience from slaves, the overwhelming majority of whom do not wish to be a member of your society, do not agree to be bound by your laws or culture and do not want to perform the work you are forcing them to do.

That you would even attempt to make such a comparison speaks of a truly dangeorus level of mendacity.



When you try to strip away layers of human feeling and reason on a whim, when you are willing to toy with the pleasure and pain responses of a sentient, self-aware mind to coerce obedience, when you reduce human beings to impulses and stimuli that you manipulate to get what you want - then you approach a point that is beyond even moral bankruptcy.

People of the State, of the Empire, of the Republic, of the Federation, of the Cartel and the Syndicate and the Society: when Rodj Blake looks at a human being, he does not seem a creature of feelings and thoughts, logic and emotion. He does not see a being of cold reason or vibrant passion. For all that he speaks of religion and God, when he looks at a human being, he does not see a soul.

What Rodj Blake sees when he looks at a person is a piece of meat that is either doing and thinking what he wants it to do and think, or not.

And he can't have that.

And there is no measure too grotesque, too base, too reprehensible, too unspeakably vile that Rodj Blake will not exploit to rectify a rebellious slab of meat that isn't doing what he wants it to do.

I, for one, am shocked by all these persons saying that everything is Not Found in the writings of the Scriptures.

Surely, all that a person need know may be found in the Scriptures?