I'm not trying to whitewash the Lunars as perfect. I enjoy them as a corrupt and imperfect. So were the Athenians and the USA, two other examples others keep bringing up.
I object to (or simply don't understand) the characterization that the Lunar philosophy is "pro-slavery". Even though they, the Athenians, and the (early) USA had slaves, you wouldn't characterize their philosophy as pro-slave. For example, if the USA philosophy were pro-slave, they would have enslaved the natives (like the Spanish tended to do) instead of slaughtering them. :-( Likewise, a major goal of Lunar expansion is NOT to get more slaves for economic benefit, it is (at least partly) to get converts to the Lunar way, more like the Arabs in the 7th century or Communists in the 20th.
Nick's argument that you must be bound before you are free starts to make some sense. Does this mean that a good, highly religious Lunar would voluntarily enslave themself in order to better reach an understanding of the Goddess? That could be an intersting scenario...
As Andrew noted to Roderick, the passage was not in Biturian's voice, but in the objective voice.
Powered by hypermail