Moral Responsibility In Fredrick Douglass Teachings

During the times taking place in Douglass’s narrative, the majority of southerners were dedicated Christians. Ironically, those same people owned slaves. While many people would agree that owning another human being is morally wrong, slaveholders seemed to find it acceptable. Although some slaveholders were considered more or less cruel than others, the act of considering a fellow human being one’s property is cruel enough to be considered immoral, and goes against the teachings of the church. To many people, it is a mystery as to how people of faith could behave so horribly to another person. One idea is that the power that comes with owning a slave could not be handled by many men, causing them to live in a way that goes against the morals

Being a wealthy white male in an era when wealthy white men dominated every aspect of society could easily make one lose sense of morality. Many may have bought and owned slaves simply because they had the power to. Society’s view of wealthy white men gave many of the men a false sense of importance, causing them to lose touch with the church’s teachings. With such power, some may have viewed themselves as deserving of such behavior, and may have felt entitled to treat men whom they viewed as beneath them with little respect. Another reason many of these Christians may have allowed themselves to participate in something so immoral could have been that they did not believe what they were doing was wrong. People sometimes tend to pick and choose what they practice. Just because the slave holders were told to “love thy neighbor” does not mean they considered slaves worthy to be considered a “neighbor.” In other words, slaves were not viewed as the whites’ equal, so the slave owners did not believe that the commandment applied to slaves. They believed that the way they treated the slaves was justified because the slaves were below