Dragazes pisze: ↑16-07-2026, 14:03
Bzdury. Ale miałeś szansę się czegoś nauczyć. Nie chcesz to nie.
Jakie kurwa bzdury skoro jest to napisane w linku, który wkleiłeś XD
Widzę kolejny kurwa masterfulowy katol analfabeta XD
" John Francis Maxwell notes that the bull did not change the traditional teaching that the enslavement of Indians was permissible if they were considered "enemies of Christendom" as this would be considered by the Church as a "just war". Stogre further argues that the Indian nations had every right to self-defense.[8] Rodney Stark describes the bull as "magnificent" and believes the reason that, in his opinion, it has belatedly come to light is due to the neglect of Protestant historians.[9] Toyin Falola asserts that the bull related to the native populations of the New World and did not condemn the transatlantic African slave trade stimulated by the Spanish monarchy and the Holy Roman Emperor."
I jeszcze tu:
"David Brion Davis asserts it was annulled due to a dispute with the Spanish crown.[15] The Council of The West Indies and the Crown concluded that the documents broke their patronato rights and the Pope withdrew them, though they continued to circulate and be quoted by La Casas and others who supported Indian rights."
jakbyś przeczytał co wkleiłeś mógłbyś się czegoś nauczyć XD