It was not universal in the ancient world. Such belies your misunderstanding of history.<quoted text> Your disdain for slavery does not change the fact slavery was universal in the ancient world. Nor does it address the fact slavery is equally as valid as poicies against slavery since it is humans who determine right and wrong in a world absent God. Your disdain carries no real weight other than your opinion. If we have no souls and there is no accountability since there is no existence post death then people can come to a different conclusion than do you when it comes to slavery. If we can own dogs then we can own people. Anti slavery only makes sense if human rights are derived from an ultimate Authority which holds us accountable for how we treat each other. That we all have unalienable rights which cannot be denied without severe consequences in a court of no appeal. Atheism reduces people to the level of big brained animals. Nothing more since it could be argued insects are more adapted and stronger than humans.
And, even if it was, a perfectly moral being would not condone slavery merely because His Creations, who in your religion are fallen and less than perfect, use slavery.
Seriously, that is the worst argument you could make. That's the "if a human jumps off a cliff, God should too" anti-motherly argument. Didn't your mother ever tell you not to follow other people's examples of immoral behavior?
Further, you are arguing against your own religion here. You are claiming above that morality is human, not absolute. Sure, I can agree with that. As such we contemporary humans, with our vast knowledge of history, our sciences of human thought, emotion, philosophy, suffering and pain, and our laws and concept of human rights, understand what it means to be moral a great deal more than any of the elite cared to bother with in the past.
You've damned yourself in your argument by distancing yourself from your religion, which argues for an absolute morality (while presenting a contradictory front of endorsing slavery) from which humans draw their own, to presenting an argument where human morality is subjective, changing with the times.
That's not a problem from my position. I don't hold that there are any deities. I neither hold that there is a perfect being from which we draw our morality. However, I believe we can know what misery, suffering, happiness and fulfillment are and seek out those qualities through society.
Christianity clearly does not present a path of morality of the greatest good for the greatest number of people. It requires subservience, obedience to a strange set of rules - some sexual, some regarding food that its followers pay more or less adherence to, depending on historical forces.
We need a better moral and ethical position than religion can provide - whatever the religion. You all fail. Muslim, Christian, Buddhist, Hindu, whatever. You're all from the past and you all preach atrocity.
To quote your religion: "Get behind me, Satan!"
Your time is past.