Debate Question: How can it be acceptable to Muslims for one Muslim to enslave another? Yet this is what has happened in Islamic history (see video below):
Slavery EVEN IN HEAVEN. Awaiting the Muslims in heaven will be "[servant] boys [especially] for them, as if they were pearls well-protected." (Quran 52:24). This is also alluded to in Quran 76:19.
Our Debate Question: In Islamic heaven, why can you not have your wishes immediately satisfied say by snapping your fingers, without the need for slavery?
ALLAH HIMSELF EVEN HAS SLAVES. We read in Quran 43:19 (Hafs version): "And they have made the angels, who are slaves of the Most Merciful, females. Did they witness their creation? Their testimony will be recorded, and they will be questioned."
Another Debate Question: Why does Allah need slaves when all he has to do if he wants something done is say "Be, and it is"? (see Quran 36:82).
Given that Muslims OWNED SLAVES for centuries after Muhammad died, and that all-knowing Allah knew that they would own slaves for centuries, has "Allah" been a good role model for the Muslims in owning slaves himself?
Islam's Messenger of Allah not only owned slaves, he traded them as well. The Quran instructs Muslims to regard Muhammad as a fine role model. Thus, is it a surprise that Muslims were heavily involved in owning & trading slaves for centuries?
[That Muhammad owned slaves we know from the Quranic verse, 33:50, giving Muhammad permission to marry his femaie slaves. Moreover, the hadiths give the names of some of Muhammad's slaves, with Sahih Bukhari mentioning at least two (Anjasha & Mi'dam)]
The Debate Question that we ask ourselves is "Did Muhammad get a good deal?" as we read the following hadith:
Consider the following hadith, from Sahih Bukhari: "Narrated Kurib: the freed slave of Ibn 'Abbas, that Maimuna bint Al-Harith [One of Muhammad's many wives] told him that she manumitted a slave-girl without taking the permission of the Prophet. On the day when it was her turn to be with the Prophet, she said, 'Do you know, O Allah's Apostle, that I have manumitted my slave-girl?' He said, 'Have you really?' She replied in the affirmative. He said, 'You would have got more reward if you had given her (i.e. the slave-girl) to one of your maternal uncles.'"
Our Debate Question is simply "Why would Allah (who grants 'rewards') want this slave to continue to be enslaved, rather than to be immediately set free?"
Now consider this hadith, from Sahih Muslim: "Imran b. Husain reported that a person who had no other property emancipated six slaves of his at the time of his death. Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) called for them and divided them into three sections, cast lots amongst them, and set two free and kept four in slavery; and he (the Holy Prophet) spoke severely of him."
2nd Debate Question: "Why does Muhammad prefer most of the slaves being kept in bondage rather than being set free, when the slaves are not even his to begin with?
What Muhammad could have said instead
From Sahih Bukhari, we read this statement:
Statement 1) "The Prophet said 'None of you should flog his wife as he flogs a slave and then have sexual intercourse with her in the last part of the day.'"
Now Muhammad could have instead given us this statement:
Statement 2) "None of you should flog his wife, none of you should flog a slave, and none of you should own a slave."
So the Debate Question then is: "Which statement is wiser, Statement 1 or Statement 2?