<div class=MsoNormal style="MARGIN: 0in 0in 0pt"><FONT face="Times New Roman" size=3>Quoting Zev Sero:</FONT></div><PRE><?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" /><o:p> </o:p></PRE><PRE><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman'">“But that doesn't change the way authentic Torah Jews think -- by which I mean Jews who didn't grow up absorbing USAn culture and values and learning to idolise people like Washington and Lincoln. Believe it or not, such people still exist. The fact that we regard slavery as unthinkable doesn't mean we're morally superior, it means that we have been so infected with goyishe values that they have become part of us; that's</SPAN><o:p></o:p></PRE><PRE><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman'">nothing to be proud of.”</SPAN><o:p></o:p></PRE><PRE><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman'"><?xml:namespace prefix = u1
/><u1:p> </SPAN><o:p></o:p></PRE></u1:p><PRE><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman'">I don’t think that there is a single approach to these issues. Some benefit from the direct approach: “ our values, and thinking are warped” ; others do not. The goal is the same either way: to deepen one’s conviction and understanding that Hashem is the ultimate source of mercy, and that his laws are perfect. </SPAN><o:p></o:p></PRE><PRE><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman'"><u1:p> </SPAN><o:p></o:p></PRE></u1:p><PRE><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman'">Regarding this, and similar questions regarding Torah and 21st century ethics(I’m, thinking of at least five other cases), I prefer to acknowledge a good question, and a clash in values. There is a psychological benefit to this, because acknowledging a question rather than repressing it(not that I think that you are
doing that if it works for yourself), reduces it’s intensity. It doesn’t work for me to say, “I’m infected with goyish values, and my thinking is warped”. To the contrary, I think that my thinking(at least at times) is perfectly normal, and that not all “goyishe values” are inherently bad. </SPAN><o:p></o:p></PRE><PRE><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman'"><u1:p> </SPAN><o:p></o:p></PRE></u1:p><PRE><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman'"> Similarly, someone who is thinking about the mitzvah of mechiyas Amaleik can say,”the reason I have trouble understanding it is because I’m affected by goyish values”. Or he can say that “I’m following human logic and emotion, which in many cases <SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>is a perfectly rational and <SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>logical thing to do, but I need to understand the Torah’s values”.
</SPAN><o:p></o:p></PRE><PRE><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman'"><u1:p> </SPAN><o:p></o:p></PRE></u1:p><PRE><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman'"><u1:p> </SPAN><o:p></o:p></PRE></u1:p><PRE><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman'">In the specific case of slavery, it is certainly a very rational and normal thought, and not just a “goyish” one, to say that “rational and enlightened ethics” tell us that it is unjust for one human being to have an ownership of another(yes, those claiming to follow “rational and enlightened ethics” can create concentration camps, but that doesn’t destroy the concept entirely). Certainly,<SPAN style="mso-spacerun: yes"> </SPAN>no one can honestly say that every person would want to be owned by another person, rather than being an exploited worker(see below). But our belief that the Torah is Divine,
tells us that this halacha is ethical. Just as one should imitate Hashem’s kindness and avoid avodas perech by an eved k’nani(see Rambam in Hilchos Avodim, ninth perek), so too , I believe that the whole concept of human ownership is ultimately not a contradiction to the concept that Hashem<o:p></o:p></SPAN></PRE><PRE><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman'"> created the world out of goodness(Ramchal in Daas Tevunos), and that even the halacha of permitting avodas perech by eved k’naani(m’ikkar hadin) is part of a merciful Torah. </SPAN><o:p></o:p></PRE><PRE><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman'"><u1:p> </SPAN><o:p></o:p></PRE></u1:p><PRE><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman'"><u1:p> </SPAN><o:p></o:p></PRE></u1:p><PRE><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 12pt; FONT-FAMILY: 'Times New Roman'">One can minimize the question by saying that slaves are better off than exploited miners or those in
sweatshops (I have seen this quoted in the name of Rav Kook, Igrot HaRaaya , vol.1 no.89), but I still don’t think it completely, rationally, answers the question, as some would prefer the latter, and in any event, not every slave would have been born to an exploited life. Although slavery is not a chok like parah adumah, one can still attempt to give a rational basis for the Torah law, but at the same time say that the ultimate understanding eludes us at the current time. As I said above, I have no problem saying our problem is “we have been so infected with goyishe values”, but at the same time, if a different approach yields the same goal, then I see no need to use your approach exclusively.</SPAN><o:p></o:p></PRE><p> 
<hr size=1>Don't pick lemons.<br>
See all the <a href="http://autos.yahoo.com/new_cars.html;_ylc=X3oDMTE0OGRsc3F2BF9TAzk3MTA3MDc2BHNlYwNtYWlsdGFncwRzbGsDbmV3Y2Fycw--">new 2007 cars</a> at <a href="http://autos.yahoo.com/new_cars.html;_ylc=X3oDMTE0OGRsc3F2BF9TAzk3MTA3MDc2BHNlYwNtYWlsdGFncwRzbGsDbmV3Y2Fycw--">Yahoo! Autos.</a>