A committed monogamous homosexual versus a slave owner
Consider two people, Jack and Fred. Jack is in a committed monogamous homosexual relationship of 10 years while Fred owns 10 slaves.
As is the custom at the time, Fred works his slaves in chain gangs and houses them in workhouses which are so low the slaves cannot stand up. Any children of the slaves became Fred’s property (these details are taken from The Dictionary of Paul and His Letters)
According to St Paul in Romans 1, Jack incurs the anger of God and is depraved; but about Fred, St Paul has nothing to say.
In the situation described, does it not seem morally more opprobrious to own slaves than to live in a homosexual relationship? Was Paul wrong about both?