gbwt
Full Member
Posts: 239
|
Slavery
Apr 21, 2005 22:02:56 GMT -5
Post by gbwt on Apr 21, 2005 22:02:56 GMT -5
well?
|
|
Lemuriania
New Member
This is a flag. This is a flag on drugs.
Posts: 39
|
Slavery
May 4, 2005 18:29:09 GMT -5
Post by Lemuriania on May 4, 2005 18:29:09 GMT -5
It's has a confusing standing. There's no "slavery" in the terms of people getting captured and used for work. However, BDSM style slavery is accepted and somewhat reglulated by the government (a contract of consect has to be signed once every three months).
|
|
gbwt
Full Member
Posts: 239
|
Slavery
May 4, 2005 20:24:41 GMT -5
Post by gbwt on May 4, 2005 20:24:41 GMT -5
i'm talking about simply legaly owning someone. In any awy shape or form apart from your boss at work. This ranges from a slave trade, to owning someone as a pet or such. A little more clear?
|
|
|
Slavery
May 4, 2005 22:03:04 GMT -5
Post by Ciata on May 4, 2005 22:03:04 GMT -5
In our society it is unthinkable. Though we do not view all creatures as totaly equal all the time, putting one in a manner of servanthood beyond that of like an aprentace or kyu in martial arts is just not a possible thing, especialy with our religion.
|
|
|
Slavery
Jun 27, 2005 23:17:06 GMT -5
Post by Baradun on Jun 27, 2005 23:17:06 GMT -5
No. Firstly because it makes no economic sense and secondly because it makes no civil sense. Furthermore sexual relationships are not the domain of the state and therefore if such things as B, D, S or even M take place it's not within the state's power to regulate. All sexual relations must be consentual, of course, so if all parties agree they can do whatever they want, provided they don't kill or seriously injure one another.
|
|