I agree with part of what you're saying, Paul, though I think we can retain our humanity and self while allowing for the differences of time and culture. I will give an extreme example: female infanticide. This practice has been widespread in China for centuries (the euphemism for it is "giving the baby a bath"). It is repugnant to me, but I also realize that Buddhist belief means the dead babies will be reborn again, so this is a temporary circumstance. There is also the cultural imperative that only a son can take care of his aged parents (daughters are required by tradition to care for their husband's parents). Dying without a son not only means the family line dies out, but you will have no one to take care of you, and China still does not have a social security program.

That Drake's methods were cruel even by their time is evidenced by the existence of mutiny (and hence the severe punishment for that crime). That beliefs back then were different is without question: during the Irish potato famine, the English were against helping the starving because it was believed to do so would rob them of their desire to work (I won't go into the link to our modern debate about the evils or necessity for welfare). So the famine was worsened by the same mode of thinking that put debtors in prison and lunatics in chains and darkness.

Bottom line: we must be careful about judging others, but that doesn't mean that certain practices are just plain cruel no matter what the age.

Bill Cross

To subscribe, change options, or unsubscribe please see the instructions at
http://listlva.lib.va.us/archives/va-roots.html