I am not particularly troubled by Aristotle's comments on slavery in this case, especially that he is associating it with disposition. In terms of practical reality it is well-known that he believed that slavery was temporal and a result of labour-specialisation; that it would not be needed; "if, in like manner, the shuttle would weave and the plectrum touch the lyre without a hand to guide them, chief workmen would not want servants, nor masters slaves." (Politics, Book I)

I should need to elucidate the numerous documents of Judeo-Christian support for slavery, without a doubt you are already aware of them.

The near-universal practise of infanticide was, of course, justified by those in that context. It is to the credit to the Judiac (and subsequently Christian and Moslem) to oppose it. But on that area you will find that my views are similar to those of Peter Singer who, in some cases, consider infanticide ethically just.

"You can be a total romantic, but that will not harmonize modern liberalism and ancient paganism."

As previously mentioned, I have no desire to do so. My claim is that the secular approach is universal and does not derive from either Hellenic polytheism or Judeo-Christianity monotheism, or any other religious tradition. Neither Athens nor Jerusalem!