It was just as accepted then, as it is now. Slavery has been spoken out against for millenia. It's only now as a civilization, that the world is starting to mature.

How does a serious question like this get buried under 1000's of silly pointless questions about sexuality or wether my dog is gay when millions of people are still being held as slaves in the world today? More than at any time in history? If we fought a war to end slavery why is it more common and accepted than in any time in history? This blows me away! I was not aware that this was this big of a problem until I read that link and it's swept under the rug on answerbag! Do people not have the courage or conviction to deal with this issue anymore? Unbelieveable!

Some people still live in the "dark ages"!

Maybe because we are all so focused on the slavery in the mid 1800s and the way it ended that we have forgotten to be vigilant. As long as we continue with this fake guilt and fake self-flagellation that says Americans are evil, Americans are the only evil people in the world, white male Americans are the most evil of Americans, and we deserve whatever comes to us, that leaves everyone else off the hook to do whatever they want and we don't even watch them. It also destroys the souls of our white male sons, who weren't even alive when those supposed crimes of white maledom were committed. So let's be a little more honest and a little more wise. ALL HUMAN BEINGS OF EITHER GENDER AND ANY COLOR ARE CAPABLE OF EVIL. This is part of the human condition. Hitler was not the only perpetrator of genocide and white male Americans were not the only perpetrators of slavery. It has existed throughout history and across the world. What was different about slavery in the mid 1800s was it was the first time that race based economic slavery was employed. It was the first time that slavery passed from one generation to the next. It was the first time that it wasn't a punishment for debt or crime. It was also the first time that the ruling class (white Americans) went to war to stop it. That is the part that no one talks about, and I don't understand why. In what was then a very small country and a very small population, hundreds of thousand of white men of all ages gave their lives to preserve the Union and end slavery. But somehow, all we talk about are the men that created it and fought to preserve it.

We were more religious back then non-religious people are cool with human slavery or sex trading.

The Emancipation Proclamation was not an internationally accepted document. It only deals with slavery in America. In fact, it wasn't even accepted by the Confederacy until it lost the war. Are you suggesting we should go to war against the nations mentioned in the article as well??? Isn't our plate full enough yet?

social evolution, what we precieve to be right changes over time

Humans have not changed an iota.

Slavery within the States has always been an issue as evidenced in the Federalist Papers and even Jefferson's arguments for equality -- like many founding fathers, a slave owner who aspired that one day the country would be free of the peculiar institution. From the first Quaker abolitionists of the 1700s, through the unilateral manumissions of one northern state at a time, the Fugitive Slave Laws, the Missouri Compromise, the Dred Scott Decision, the Civil War, Reconstruction (and the century-long recovery from Reconstruction), the dismantling of Jim Crow and the Civil Rights struggle from the 1920s to the present, America is still dealing with the effects of her slave history. With a few *cough* exceptions in the twentieth century, going back at least as far as George Washington's farewell address to the nation in 1796 when he prudently cautioned against "foreign entanglements," it has been traditional American foreign policy to stay out of other countries' affairs. This would include American involvement in the interior politics of other sovereign states for the sake of interfering in their policies on slavery, or anything else that does not negatively affect our ability to function with reasonable self determination as a sovereign state among the world community of sovereign states -- and in return, it is expected that they should not involve themselves in our internal policies. This ethic of "hands off" was expressed quite clearly and sincerely by George W. Bush in his "We are not in the business of nation-building" campaign speech in 2000. However, this sentiment was abruptly voided by the actions of none other than Mr. Bush's evil twin on March 20, 2003. Slavery is still considered heinous among civilized nations of the world and by some counts, it is nearly as prevalent as it was in the 1800s. But like many distasteful, disturbing, depressing, boring and complex subjects that may repel the viewer, it's just not covered very well by the mainstream media because stories like this are distasteful, disturbing, depressing, boring and complex and may repel the viewer. Instead, our media, which is encapsulated in the efficient homogeneity of a few very large multinational corporations with common interests that are not consistent with the interests of the citizen, strive to inform us of such important events as the daily activities of the likes of Ms. Britney Spear's and her earth-shattering career-resuscitating VMA performance and weight loss, or Paris Hilton's clothing line for toy chihuahuas and red carpet nipple-peek, or (in the face of Herculean media efforts to revive her) the stubbornly deceased Anna Nicole Smith's court-ordered handwriting analysis with accompanying stills gratuitously showcasing her prominent breasts (in vitro, for now), or J-Lo's latest spat with hubby including obligatory pics of her unique butt in ample profile, or Li-Lo's most recent coke-fueled escape from rehab with resultant fenderbender, repentant mascara runoff and maladjusted cameltoe, or Nicole Ritchie launching into paparazzi-induced public spazzolepsy complete with mouthfroth, eyeroll and audible grunts, or the next celebrity panty-less beavershots captured while exiting a limo on Rodeo Drive (digitally obscured for viewer safety), or the hourly measurement updates of Kim Kardashian's incredibly inflating ass -- all of which supersedes everything else in importance to the extent that there is no air time available for any other content among the scores of international 24-hour TV news outlets except, of course, sports which includes the intellectually meaningless, emotionally-draining, diaphoretic, marathon ad hominem screaming matches that pass as news analysis, debate, political interview, and panel discussion. Which naturally brings me back to the subject of slavery. Our own. But it's late. Goodnight.

No i dont feel anyone likes to be slave.indeed they all demand a free life.U may find so many bloodsheds and war still going on in so many countries just to avoid slavery.