Fredrick Douglass Anti-Slavery Debate

Ideally, anti-slavery debate consisted of many arguments fronted by mainly former slaves. The former slaves provided a clear picture of the slave situation, particularly in America. Therefore, they attempted to highlight the plight of the slaves. Fredrick Douglass, a former slave escapist from Maryland, is a renowned anti-slave crusader and a believer in slave abolitionism. In his narrative, Douglass explains his journey a slave in which his experiences influence the arguments he fronts during his anti-slavery campaign. In this context, Douglas argues that slavery was cruel, inhumane and was supported by the Christian religion his masters believed in and abided. Additionally, he argues that slavery is not legal however much the whites tried

to portray it as constitutional. That it infringed on the basic rights a free man.
That slavery was cruel, atrocious and corrupts the master
Douglass in his narrative depicts that slavery led to the bad things that were done by their masters who anyway had been good people.

Throughout the narrative, Fredrick Douglass gives a descriptive account of his experiences as a slave and his arguments against the practice of slavery is evident in these experience. He describes how he witnessed his aunt Hester being whipped by her master Ms. Auld. Aunt Hester "was led into the kitchen, forced to strip from her neck to her lower waist, leaving her entire neck, shoulders and the back entirely naked. Also, He then told her to cross her pair of hands and soon the warm red blood came dripping from the floor. Furthermore, I was so terrified and horror-stricken when I saw the scenario" (Douglass, 1845). His argument is that Ms. Auld became a bad person because of owning slaves. "Also, this good heart had but a little time to remain such. In addition, the dangerous poison due to irresponsible power was in her lethal hands, and soon commenced its infernal work. Also, that cheerful eye under the influence of slavery soon became fumed with anger; the voice made of sweet rhythm, changed to one of harsh, rude and horrid discord’’ (Douglass, 1845). From this experience, we are able to learn that Douglass argument was that slaves were not treated as human beings and were considered as property. Douglass states that “I trace my first glimmering conception of the dehumanizing character of slavery” (Douglass,

1845).
Slaves were ruled by continual terror and extrajudicial system
The slave owners and their overseers were supreme beings and that their word was law.

The slave owners consistently instilled fear into the slaves through terrific events supported by the judicial system at that time. Douglass remembers an incident where Gore whipped a fellow slave named Demby consistently to death. Even after killing Demby, Gore was upbeat and did not seem bothered since the law seemingly legalized slavery, and a master's words were law. Gore would later explain to Loyd that the killing of Demby would act as an example to any disobedient slave. The rule had been set ‘obey or die’. Douglass argues that there existed different moral and legal systems for both the slaves and their masters. Additionally, Douglass argues that slaves were ruled by their masters through examples and were scared into submission through physical and mental

force.
Slavery was supported falsely by Christian religion
In chapter IX of the narrative, Douglass describes how he returned to his master Mr. Thomas Auld in Maryland, March 1832. He says that his new master gave him just enough food to sustain him since Auld was poor and only acquired slaves and property through marriage. The slaves were, therefore, contemptuous of him. Also, Douglass describes Thomas as "a slaveholder without the capacity to hold slaves and incapable of managing his slaves either by force, fear, or fraud." (Douglass, 1845). Douglass narrates that Thomas became a very religious man during their stay together although his new found religion did not make him any humble or kinder to the slaves. It made him even worse. Thomas "ultimately found a religious defense for his cruelty" and often quoted scriptures as he while whipping the slaves (Douglass, 1845). With this experience, Douglass argues that slavery was supported by religion though true religion ought to condemn servitude. Moreover, after his escape, Douglass criticizes the whites for hypocrisy by not condemning slavery. Christianity should never be used to support slavery as servitude is against Christian virtues.
In another incident, Douglass narrates that cruelty of Covey, who purported to be a staunch Christian. He argues that Covey demanded much from the slave sand often pushed them beyond limits to deliver. The slaves worked for long hours while Covey consistently spied on them to find out that they truly did work. Despite Covey’s religious nature, in realized the benefits of breeding the slaves and, therefore, bought a female slave and paid a man to have sex with her. Douglass describes this experience as the lowest point in his life as a slave; he even thought of killing Covey. Even after these inhuman act, Covey still believed that he was a true Christian. Douglass argues that this can never Christianity. It was sheer pretense and hypocrisy used to justify slavery.
Conclusion
Fundamentally, having read the narrative of Fredrick Douglass on his experience as a slave, it is agreeable that slavery has no place in a free society. To the extent that slavery was cruel and inhuman, it can never be justified by any means either by religion or legal basis. It is hence evident that Douglass arguments are the truth about the institution of slavery.