For those that accuse Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) of being a pedophile

[The Giant]

Allah is a myth you stupid mother fucker.

Mohammed,the fuckhead he is,brainwashed a little girl and had sex with her.

IT IS WHAT IT IS.

[Thrilla-Ali]

Originally Posted by The Giant

Allah is a myth you stupid mother fucker.

Mohammed,the fuckhead he is,brainwashed a little girl and had sex with her.

IT IS WHAT IT IS.

Go back far enough in your lineage and i bet your ancestors were "pedophiles" too.. since young marriages were a cultural norm not only in the middle east, but other places such as europe and africa as well.. So i guess you dislike your ancestors? It wasn't their fault.. they were only practicing what they thought was normal to them.

FYI Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) did not "brainwash" aisha, she consented to the marriage and so did her parents, since it was a cultural norm back then, no-one had a problem with it and it didn't raise any brows.

Get a clue, you buffoon.

[The Giant]

Read my fucking lips...Allah...Is...Not...Real.

[The Giant]

havent read all of this, but the first post was a good one.

As a matter of fact, during these times young marriages were evident in all continents (Africa, Asia, Europe...)

word.. in shakespeares romeo and juliet, juliet was 13, and i believe romeo was 19 or in his early 20s.

[menaz]

1. First i will start off with sex slaves in the bible..

Fine with me. I'm not a christian. Nor due I believe in sexual slavery. You don't know how to debate at all. You just proved you're a irrational reactionary and a person who creates straw men arguments to further his pointless rants. There is no point in discussion with someone who doesn't want to follow what someone else is saying to them. you're being intellectually dishonest.

2. Aisha was engaged to Muhammad (pbuh) at the age of six, but he married her at the age of nine. (that's why she moved into his house at nine, duh?)

That's a half-truth.

Muhammad proposed and married her at the age of six. If we go by Abu-Dawud or Sahih Muslim I'll give you the age of seven. The evidence however is over whelming and the most creditable hadith of highest authority Narrated by 'Aisha herself backs the claim up that muhammad married her at age six and had intercourse with her by the age of nine.

"Sahih Bukhari Volume 8, Book 73, Number 151
Narrated 'Aisha:I used to play with the dolls in the presence of the Prophet, and my girl friends also used to play with me. When Allah's Apostle used to enter (my dwelling place) they used to hide themselves, but the Prophet would call them to join and play with me. (The playing with the dolls and similar images is forbidden, but it was allowed for 'Aisha at that time, as she was a little girl, not yet reached the age of puberty.) (Fateh-al-Bari page 143, Vol.13)"

You read her own words - she was playing with dolls when she entered Mohammad's house as a bride. You can also see the narrator say that dolls were allowed only for girls before puberty.


This is not hard to follow...

"Sahih Muslim Book 008, Number 3311
'A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) married her when she was seven years old, and he was taken to his house as a bride when she was nine, andher dolls were with her; and when he (the Holy Prophet) died she was eighteen years old."

So, at the age of nine when the marriage was consummated (meaning she was summoned to have intercourse with muhammad for the first time in their already existent marriage, it took place in his house), she brought her dolls with her meaning she was also not yet at puberty.

Sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 88
Narrated 'Ursa: The Prophet wrote the with 'Aisha while she was six years old and consummated his marriage with her while she was nine years old and she remained with him for nine years (i.e. till his death).

Yours is nerrated by Ursa, not Aisha herself.

"Sahih Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 62, Number 64 (most reliable and most prestigious of the collections of hadith.) Narrated 'Aisha: "that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years" (i.e. till his death)."

This is nerrated by Aisha herself.

"Sahih Bukhari 5.236.
Narrated Hisham's father:
Khadija died three years before the Prophet departed to Medina. He stayed there for two years or so and then he married 'Aisha when she was a girl of six years of age, and he consumed that marriage when she was nine years old."

This is Narrated by Hisham's father which also comfrims what Aisha narrated in Sahih Bukhari. You are being intellectually dishonest.

He was waiting till she hit puberty.

Average age for the first period is -13 years, and it barely changes around the world. http://www.mum.org/worldmen.jpg Also, puberty is a process taking 4 years on average, and a 9 year old wouldn't have the emotional maturity to handle it. It was also pedophilia for that reason as well. He waited til she was nine to have intercourse with her because that was the age he agreed with Abu Bakr, but here is a list of sexual acts/halal methods of pleasuring he did to her before she even turned nine it's still pedophilia:

Thighing


Sahih Dawood Book 1, Number 0270:

Narrated Aisha, Ummul Mu'minin:
One night prophet entered upon me and said: Uncover your thighs. I, therefore, uncovered both of my thighs. Then he put his cheek and chest on my thighs.


Fondling

Bukhari,Volume 1, Book 6, Number 299:

'Aisha said: "Whenever Allah's Apostle wanted to fondle me, he used to order me to put on an "Izar" and start fondling. Izar = (simplest form of a white sheet veil)


Daydreaming

Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 71, Number 660:

Narrated Aisha:
“Allah's Apostle used to think that he had sexual intercourse while he actually had not”


The Bottom-line

Bukhari, Book 002, Number 0572:

Aisha said “ Whenever I found dried semen on the garments of the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him), I scraped it off with my nails.

Just because he didn't have sexual intercourse with her until she was nine doesn't mean he wasn't menatally a pedophile nor does it mean he didn't physically commit pedophilia. Because without question he did both.

3. How do you know god found young marriages unethical back in the early centuries, a primitive time? Are you god? As a matter of fact, the minimum age for marriage under Jewish law was 13 for boys, 12 for girls. So i ask you again, how do you know god found it unethical back then? It made sense at that time, but not today... we have evolved from biblical times and the mind-set of society is different now. I guess every Semite living in the 7th century was a pedophile too since it was a cultural norm, right menaz?

What is the relevence of this irrelevent browbeating in regards to me? You seem confused in this discourse. You have no rationality you can't follow what is said to you. How many times do I have to tell you that pedophilia is morally wrong regardless of the norm before you comprehend it? Alot of the mind sets in control of islam haven't changed and that's the problem with a muslim theocracy that imitates the ways of mohammad.

[menaz]

. Aisha had a choice weather to accept the marriage or not, she accepted. . Her parents accepted . It did not raise any brows for it was a cultural norm So then what was wrong about it at that time if it was accepted by everyone including the bride?

There you go again with the illogical thinking advocating muhammads pedophilia as a proper teaching for muslims to follow. This is what I'm talking about you don't see anything wrong with advocating pedophilia. However, there is a misrepersentation you just told I like to correct.

her father (Abu Bakr) did object, but one can't really win that argument with the islamic leader now can they? What the pedophile islamic leader wants the pedophile islamic leader will get.

Muslim Book 62, Number 18:

"Narrated 'Ursa:
The Prophet asked Abu Bakr for 'Aisha's hand in marriage. Abu Bakr said "But I am your brother." The Prophet said, "You are my brother in Allah's religion and His Book, but she (Aisha) is lawful for me to marry."

Bukharihari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 37:

"Narrated Ibn 'Abbas:
It was said to the Prophet, "Won't you marry the daughter of Hamza?" He said, "She is my foster niece (brother's daughter). "


Abu Bakr tried to get muhammad to marry the daughter of Hamza because even Bukhari thought his own daughter Aisha was far too young for his age. Tell me, if pedophilia is the norm does that make it morally right? if murder is the norm does that make it morally right? if corruption and greed is the norm does that make it morally right? If I jump off a bridge does that mean you have to jump off the bridge?

4. You always scape goat islam here on rm.com - - no poster here is unaware of that. If you think Judaism and Christianity is 'better' than islam by way of scripture (which i think you do), we can go quote for quote = ) I will pretend I'm an atheist just like you to prove my point, and do it solidly. Contrary to what you might think.. the OT is also a christian book. Don't forget that the god of the NT is the same god of the OT.. LoL

I am a skeptic/agnostic always have been. You're not making your point by becoming a atheist. Instead you're coming off looking really pathetic like you know your faith is a sham just like all the others. You've just showcased to me you can't be honest about muhammads pedophilia nor can you defend your bullshit. i.e. you know I'm correct. Which means you've lost this argument and I've changed you into an atheist. Why would an atheist lie for islam anyway? LOL! nothing you say has any meaning to it nor should you be taken seriously from here on out. You speak nonsensical rethoric. It seems to me I set you free from your submission to islam so enjoy pointing out the nonsense of religion through atheistism. Perhaps later down the road you'll discover morality.

How did I scapegoat islam? Do you even know what the word scapegoat means?
You are just angery because I have rightly pointed out how your argument of muhammad (age 54) not being a pedophile due to you thinking six year old halal methods of pleasuring and nine year old child fucking of a prepubescent child in this case where the father objected as being the norm morally falls flat on it's illogical face. That was the sloppy premise of your thread. You are also just angery because I have pointed out the true problem within islam which is due to following mohammads teachings of pedophilia and sexual slavery these horrorable acts are still acceptable under islamic theocracies.

Let me get this straight I've told you twice now I don't care for christianity or Judaism and this is pretty much well known here on RM yet you keep erroreously assuming I'm of these two faiths? How can I be of these two faiths anyway? what a canard.

You say Christians and judaism condoned sex slaves I agreed they did.
You say Christians and judaism condoned pedophilia I agreed they did.
You say A and B equals X I agree A and B equals X then you say A and B doesn't equal X. You're blantantly contradicting yourself here, you just don't want to denounce muhammads pedophilia teachings.

you thinking I'm religious is a illogical assumption on your part. I have no idea who you are even addressing with those ot and nt comments. To be honest, All of you are what's wrong with intellectual dialouge. Again I expected as much from you.

5. Age of consensual sex and marriage is subjective. So lets also keep that in mind..

Well, That is the rationale of a pedophile.

[menaz]

I don't advocate pedophilia. If i lived in the 7th century, i wouldn't have a problem with young marriages because my mind would be conditioned to accept it.

I see, so you would advocate pedophilia in the past instead of being profound enough to oppose it? Some cultures killed baby daughters for various reasons. Cultural norms do not make an action morally right. simon says: thrilla must agree the nazi's putting little polish children in ovens was fine because it was the norm. Thrilla: agrees.

How can he live "above the norm" if that was the norm? Since you claim he's not a prophet and "Allah" doesn't exist, why would he need to use "Allah" as a tool for pedophilia, when young marriages were already the norm to begin with? What your saying makes no sense... he wouldn't need a 'tool' at all... according to your own line of thinking, he was an average man living in 7th century norms (since you believe he wasn't a prophet).

So now that you are an atheist that agrees Muhammad wasn't the prophet of Allah. The other issue is this, he taught his followers to do as he did. So you would also have to agree then that he utilized his religion as a tool to continue to teach others pedophilia was a proper teaching under islam as along as they were following him. The problem with this nonsense is the future generations of muslims continue to follow it as the norm. What i'm saying makes perfect sense, but you like fallacious straw men arguements, it's your illogical way of not having to comprehend the facts. He could of utilized this tool "Allah" or "his religion" to change course and condem pedophilia. Yet muhammad didn't. Don't be mad with me for pointing this out, be mad with muhammad's immoral enjoyment in doing and teaching pedophilia. Muhammad instituted a convention of sexual misconduct, i.e. allowing girls, who were not ready for marriage, to be taken.

Also, a pedophile is attracted to children only, but how come his other wives were either older than him or very mature in age?

That still makes him a pedophile. He even prefered the company of Aisha more than his other wives. infact, Aisha was his favorite wife. Most pedophiles are usually family men or have wives and deny that they abuse children, even after caught. Furthermore, Mohammad was given the choice between 30 year old Sawda Zama or 6 year old Aisha. However, He ended up marring the latter.

young marriages were a norm and they didn't hurt or startle anyone at that time.

Muhammad was a 54 yearold man who just had to molest a 6 yearold little girl, he commited halal methods of pleasuring on her until she was nine, Once she turned nine he had sexual intercourse with her, she was a prepubescent little child.

You keep advocating his act of pedophilia as a moral teaching which is the problem with islam back then and today. Alot of muslims follow the ways of muhammad today as you claimed for the norm back then, i.e. muslims are still claiming it to be the norm even today. Thus, you keep advocating this pedophilia everytime you do not repudiate your prophets teachings of pedophilia. Instead you keep trying to justify muhammads pedophilia with a fallacious argument such as it was the norm when you should be saying if muhammad was such a great thinker, as your people claim him to be, he would of put a end to pedophilia. After all, This is the immoral dipshit degenerate, alot of muslims look to for their moral guidance.

Muhammad was suppose to be a profound man correct? Yet he advocated pedophilia? Your argument is ridiculous. Your rationale is that of a pedophile or at the very least a immoral pederast sympathizer. if you could follow this conversation you'd know that you have contradicted yourself, commited Taqqiyah, and refuse to acknowledge muhammads teachings of pedophilia were morally wrong regardless of the norm back then, because it's a meme that he should of stopped instead he practiced and advocated it.

[menaz]

Originally Posted by x - calli

havent read all of this, but the first post was a good one.



word.. in shakespeares romeo and juliet, juliet was 13, and i believe romeo was 19 or in his early 20s.

FYI:

number 1.) they were fictional characters.
number 2.) Romeo's age was never given. and Juliet was 14 years old.
If you wanted to conjecture how old romeo was (considering you even actually read it.) You'd probabally come to the conclusion he was sixteen because he carried a sword.

the fact that this has to be discussed....

[Thrilla-Ali]

Originally Posted by menaz

Average age for the first period is -13 years

Aisha was pubescent at the age of nine and so were many other girls at that time.

- Al-Shafi`i in al-Umm reported that he saw countless examples of nine-year old pubescent girls in Yemen. Al-Bayhaqi also narrates it from him in the Sunan al-Kubra as does al-Dhahabi in the Siyar.

- Al-Bayhaqi narrated with his chains in his Sunan al-Kubra no less than three examples of Muslim wives that gave birth at age nine or ten.

-He (Ash-Shafi'e) also said: I have seen in the city of Sana'a a grandmother while she was twenty one. She menstruated at the age of nine and gave birth at the age of 10

-Imam Ash-Shafi'e said: "During my stay in Yemen I have come across girls at the age of nine who menstruated so often."

-Ibn Al-Jawzi narrated similar stories from Ibn U'qail and Abbad ibn Abbad Al-Muhlabi.
Abbad ibn Abbad Al-Muhlabi said: "I have witnessed a woman from Muhlabah who become a grandmother at the age of eighteen. She gave birth (to her daughter) at the age of nine and her daughter gave birth to her child at the age of nine (as well), so the woman became a grandmother at the age of eighteen

Originally Posted by menaz

There you go again with the illogical thinking advocating muhammads pedophilia as a proper teaching for muslims to follow. This is what I'm talking about you don't see anything wrong with advocating pedophilia. However, there is a misrepersentation you just told I like to correct.

her father (Abu Bakr) did object, but one can't really win that argument with the islamic leader now can they? What the pedophile islamic leader wants the pedophile islamic leader will get. Abu Bakr tried to get muhammad to marry the daughter of Hamza because even Bukhari thought his own daughter Aisha was far too young for his age.

Abu bakr initially objected but then accepted. Abu Bakr did not object because of Muhammads (pbuh) age, he objected because they were friends/brothers. During the days of pre-islamic Arabia, it was considered a cultural taboo to marry the daughter of your friend/brother. Muhammad (pbuh) abolished that cultural taboo. If Abu Bakr had a problem with Muhammad's (pbuh) age, then how come Aisha was initially betrothed to another old man, which was Jubair ibn mut'am?

Originally Posted by menaz

Tell me, if pedophilia is the norm does that make it morally right? if murder is the norm does that make it morally right? if corruption and greed is the norm does that make it morally right? If I jump off a bridge does that mean you have to jump off the bridge?

I see, so you would advocate pedophilia in the past instead of being profound enough to oppose it? Some cultures killed baby daughters for various reasons. Cultural norms do not make an action morally right. simon says: thrilla must agree the nazi's putting little polish children in ovens was fine because it was the norm. Thrilla: agrees.

First of all, murder, corruption, and greed are much different than young marriages. Murder (excluding capital punishment and casualties of the battle field), corruption, and greed are all evils that hurt people in society, and they are obviously undesirable to the people. Prophet Muhammad's (pbuh) marriage to Aisha never hurt anyone, including the bride herself, Aisha. It was considered a normal practice back in a primitive era. It did not shock anyone, nor did it cause any harm to anyone whatsoever, and that's the difference. As a matter of fact, prophet Muhammad (pbuh) abolished the practice of burying female infants at birth, because that was obviously doing harm to not only the infant but the parents as well. That was an unjust practice for obvious reasons which have been previously defined.

Originally Posted by menaz

So now that you are an atheist that agrees Muhammad wasn't the prophet of Allah. The other issue is this, he taught his followers to do as he did. So you would also have to agree then that he utilized his religion as a tool to continue to teach others pedophilia was a proper teaching under islam as along as they were following him. The problem with this nonsense is the future generations of muslims continue to follow it as the norm. What i'm saying makes perfect sense, but you like fallacious straw men arguments, it's your illogical way of not having to comprehend the facts. He could of utilized this tool "Allah" or "his religion" to change course and condem pedophilia. Yet muhammad didn't. Don't be mad with me for pointing this out, be mad with muhammad's immoral enjoyment in doing and teaching pedophilia. Muhammad instituted a convention of sexual misconduct, i.e. allowing girls, who were not ready for marriage, to be taken.

Everyone [see bold above]

Can you comprehend simple things Menaz? I guess not.

You think Muhammad (pbuh) is not a prophet, correct? In other words, you think he was an average man right? So if he was an average man, living in 7th century norms, how is he suppose to know young marriages were "wrong" if young marriages were the norm to begin with??? (the norm he was born into).. He was an average man who didn't even ponder the fact that young marriages were "wrong" just like anyone else living there at that time. In other words, How could he change course and condemn "pedophilia" when "pedophilia" was nothing more than a norm at that time?? [[see bold just in case it didn't click in yet]]

I believe prophet muhammad (pbuh) was a prophet of god. And I don't believe god found young marriages unethical back then. I believe god works with man-made cultural norms. Also, he didn't teach people pedophilia, young marriages were already a norm set in place in 7th century arabia.. so again, your wrong.

Originally Posted by menaz

Also, puberty is a process taking 4 years on average, and a 9 year old wouldn't have the emotional maturity to handle it.

The law states as soon as the girl has her first period cycle.

Originally Posted by menaz

but here is a list of sexual acts/halal methods of pleasuring he did to her before she even turned nine it's still pedophilia:

I'm pretty sure you copied and pasted that information from this website:

http://www.islam-watch.org/AyeshaAhm...-Practised.htm

Since it says the exact same thing you posted. Muhammad (pbuh) did not do any of those things before the age of nine (before she was pubescent, before he consummated his marriage with her)

Stop blindly copying and pasting lies off biased and hateful websites.

[Thrilla-Ali]

Originally Posted by menaz

Yours is nerrated by Ursa, not Aisha herself.

"Sahih Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 62, Number 64 (most reliable and most prestigious of the collections of hadith.) Narrated 'Aisha: "that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years" (i.e. till his death)."

^ That's a translational error.

The same verse you quoted, but this time in arabic

'Aishah, may God be pleased with her, narrated that the Prophet (P) was betrothed (zawaj) to her when she was six years old and he consummated (nikah) his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years. (Saheeh al-Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 62, Number 64)

"Zawaj" in arabic means engagement. The "Nikkah" means marriage in arabic.

Source: http://www.missionislam.com/knowledge/aishamarriage.pdf

In any case, even if you want to argue this further, there's no denying it was an engagement. He signed the contract at 6, and he consummated his marriage with her at the age of 9 (that's when she started living with him). He waited until she was pubescent, and then consummated his marriage with her. Keeping in mind the ideas of "political correctness" and "absolute morality", in both Biblical and Quranic times the age at which a girl could marry was puberty. So even the cultural norm during those days supports this claim (that only pubescent girls could be wedded to a man. To be betrothed or engaged doesn't require the girl to be pubescent, in that case). Keep in mind that, during those days, when you consummate a marriage, that's when the marriage becomes official. And that's why Aicha started living with Muhammad (pbuh) then after (after the marriage was consummated). I don't even know why I'm arguing about this with you, it has nothing to do with the topic at hand really. It's a red-herring on your part.

Originally Posted by menaz

Muhammad was a 54 yearold man who just had to molest a 6 yearold little girl, he commited halal methods of pleasuring on her until she was nine, Once she turned nine he had sexual intercourse with her, she was a prepubescent little child.

It doesn't matter how explicit you try to get with your argument, fact of the matter is, it was a norm back at that time. We are far from grasping the norms of 7th century Arabia because we weren't born and raised in 7th century Arabia, plain and simple.

`Aisha was not the first case, for many girls married at her same age to men who were at their fathers’ age. Hala, the cousin of Amina bint Wahb was married to Abdul-Muttalib on the same day his son `Abdullah married Aminah bint Wahb who was at Hala’s same age. Also, the Companion `Umar ibn Al-Khattab married the daughter of Ali ibn Abi Talib, may Allah honor his face, while he was at her grandpa’s age.

Originally Posted by menaz

Instead you keep trying to justify muhammads pedophilia with a fallacious argument such as it was the norm when you should be saying if muhammad was such a great thinker, as your people claim him to be, he would of put a end to pedophilia.

I will just repeat my previous comment for this one.

You think Muhammad (pbuh) is not a prophet, correct? In other words, you think he was an average man right? So if he was an average man, living in 7th century semite norms, how is he suppose to know young marriages were "wrong" if young marriages were the norm to begin with??? (the norm he was born into).. He was an average man who didn't even ponder the fact that young marriages were "wrong" just like anyone else living there at that time. In other words, How could he change course and condem "pedophilia" when "pedophilia" was nothing more than a norm at that time?? [[see bold just incase it didn't click in yet]]

I believe prophet muhammad (pbuh) was a prophet of god. And I don't believe god found young marriages unethical back then. I believe god was okay with certain man made norms back in 7th century arabia, and that this norm was accepted

Originally Posted by menaz

if you could follow this conversation you'd know that you have contradicted yourself

Yea you keep thinking that.

Originally Posted by menaz

and refuse to acknowledge muhammads teachings of pedophilia were morally wrong regardless of the norm back then, because it's a meme that he should of stopped instead he practiced and advocated it.

Pedophilia is categorized in the DSM-IV thereby making it a mental disorder. Why is it classified as a mental disorder? Because it is a behavior that diverges from commonly expressed behavior in the population. Pedophiles knowingly have the intent to not only break the law, but also break the social norms of a society by having sexual relations with little girls/boys. Pedophiles hurt and even kill their victims as well, a behavior which was not practiced by the prophet Muhammad (pbuh) or Abraham (pbuh). I believe that young marriages shouldn't be practiced (because of the culture/norm i was raised in), and that it's not suitable in todays world. However, some places are still quite primitive even today (where this practice is still a cultural norm), and what's "wrong" and "right" in relation to this issue is still subjective to different people coming from different cultures.

According to your train of thought, everyone in biblical times, and the middle ages, and in late 19th century America were "pedophiles", because they all condoned young marriages and fornication with young women. As a matter of fact, the government of Holland is ran by "pedophiles" today, since the legal age of sexual consent there is 12 years old (In Ontario, Canada it's 16 and in British Columbia, Canada it's 14. In Holland it's 12 years old, 14 in Italy (where menaz is from), France 15, Germany 16, Ireland 17, UK 16) - i know i repeated this many times but it needs some repition in this case..

As a matter of fact, the Byzantine emperors and nobility were all "pedophiles" too because Child brides as young as 8 were common among them, right Menaz? (note the sarcasm)..

I conclude..

What's "bad" is subjective. It wasn't "bad" to the Semites in biblical times, for example, and that's the whole issue here. We have evolved since those times, and our culture here is much different. We have to learn to except the differences of the past, and in some cases even the present

What made "sense" to people of the past does not necessarily make sense to us now. It may have worked in the past, but not now in other words, at least not in my opinion. We are living in the 21st century after all. We are far from grasping the norms of 7th century Arabia because we weren't born and raised in 7th century Arabia, and i believe god was okay with certain man-made norms of the past, the primitive cultures of an age-old. Even today there is subjectivity on this matter which i already mentioned and discussed.

[Thrilla-Ali]

Originally Posted by The Giant

Read my fucking lips...Allah...Is...Not...Real.

"Allah" is an Arabic word for "god" which derives from "Allaha" the aramaic word for god.

Just in case you don't realize that. If you don't believe in god, that's not my issue, that's yours, so don't make it mine.

[menaz]

Aisha was pubescent at the age of nine and so were many other girls at that time.

No she wasn't. You did not follow yet again.
Number 1.) the fact he molested her when she was six.
Number 2.) the fact she was still playing with dolls at six, seven, eight, and nine which means she was still prepubescent.
Number 3.) the argument of morality which was muhammad having sex with a nine year old is not the same as having sex with a adult women. (their emotional maturity can't handle it nor is it equivalent.)

- Al-Shafi`i in al-Umm reported that he saw countless examples of nine-year old pubescent girls in Yemen. Al-Bayhaqi also narrates it from him in the Sunan al-Kubra as does al-Dhahabi in the Siyar.-He (Ash-Shafi'e) also said: I have seen in the city of Sana'a a grandmother while she was twenty one. She menstruated at the age of nine and gave birth at the age of 10 -Imam Ash-Shafi'e said: "During my stay in Yemen I have come across girls at the age of nine who menstruated so often."-Ibn Al-Jawzi narrated similar stories from Ibn U'qail and Abbad ibn Abbad Al-Muhlabi. Abbad ibn Abbad Al-Muhlabi said: "I have witnessed a woman from Muhlabah who become a grandmother at the age of eighteen. She gave birth (to her daughter) at the age of nine and her daughter gave birth to her child at the age of nine (as well), so the woman became a grandmother at the age of eighteen- Al-Bayhaqi narrated with his chains in his Sunan al-Kubra no less than three examples of Muslim wives that gave birth at age nine or ten.

1.) that doesn't include Aisha. 2.) Sex with a pubesscent nine year old whether it is the norm or not does not make it morally right for any cultural at any time in history. A childs mind can not handle that responseablity. ( I made my stance very clear to you in my first response try following.) 3.) once again you have tried to justify pedophilia.

Abu bakr initially objected but then accepted. Abu Bakr did not object because of Muhammads (pbuh) age, he objected because they were friends/brothers. During the days of pre-islamic Arabia, it was considered a cultural taboo to marry the daughter of your friend/brother. Muhammad (pbuh) abolished that cultural taboo. If Abu Bakr had a problem with Muhammad's (pbuh) age, then how come Aisha was being wedded to another old man, which was Jubair ibn mut'am?

Caught you in another lie. another contradiction. You said before the parents didn't object. You're own words: "Her parents accepted". You tried to hide this little fact. You just admitted Muhammad breaks taboos such as marring a daughter of a friend/brother. Which tells me it doesn't matter whether something was the norm or not because Muhammad would do as he pleased as long as it benefited/pleased him. Like I said Abu Bakr couldn't really stand up to the leader of islam even though he disagreed with the marriage and tried to convice muhammad to marry the daughter of Hamza. And once again you try to justify her pedophilia. Here is someone who actually can translate arabic unlike you who does nothing but commits Taqqiyah. http://youtube.com/watchv=E_nLuWLeRLE&feature=related

First of all, murder, corruption, and greed are much different than young marriages. Murder (excluding capital punishment and casualties of the battle field), corruption, and greed are all evils that hurt people in society, and they are obviously undesirable to the people. Prophet Muhammad's (pbuh) marriage to Aisha never hurt anyone, including the bride herself, Aisha. It was considered a normal practice back in a primitive era. It did not shock anyone, nor did it cause any harm to anyone whatsoever, and that's the difference..

Actually Pedophilia does harm the child, psychology would label it stockholm syndrome. The other thing I find illogical about your line of thought here is you think pedophilia was morally ok as long as it's desired by the mass mob. lol.
You do infact advocate pedophilia today by not denouncing muhammads teachings which advocated it back then as it continues to be accepted by alot of islam still. The point was murder, corruption, pedophilia, and greed has been accepted by mass mobs before (however all four harmfully affect in their own ways) You're illogically proclaiming pedophilia is fine and dandy not harmful but these other acts are.I see, so if pedophilia doesn't cause harm according to you that makes it ok? You're thought process is so immorally twisted by your religion on this subject your blinded but I expected as much. Islamic religion makes no sense morally. The Quran says to slay men who lay with men i.e. To kill homosexuals. Yet alot of muslims follow and do as their islamic leader muhammad did when it comes to pedophilia. You obviously have no problems with murder or pedophilia then.

[menaz]

You think Muhammad (pbuh) is not a prophet, correct? In other words, you think he was an average man right? So if he was an average man, living in 7th century norms, how is he suppose to know young marriages were "wrong" if young marriages were the norm to begin with??? (the norm he was born into).. He was an average man who didn't even ponder the fact that young marriages were "wrong" just like anyone else living there at that time. In other words, How could he change course and condemn "pedophilia" when "pedophilia" was nothing more than a norm at that time?? [[see bold just in case it didn't click in yet]]

It's about your religion "islam" which claims muhammad to be insightfully profound. You're dancing around this issue because you know I'm correct. Islam claims muhammad to be a brilliant man correct? You think muhammad was a genius correct? I definitely wouldn't label him an average man since he created his own religion and got alot of arabs to follow as he did. This tells me he could minpulate. And Islam tells me he can invent his own form of reiligion to support his monotheistic allah inorder to reform his old tribe of pagan Arabs to it yet he can not condem pedophilia? Without question you have no problem advocating his acts of pedophilia. Are you saying Muhammad was not a prophet of allah? Have you turned your back on islam? Well if you think he's nothing more than a average man then why do you care if he is labeled a Pedophile? Obviously according to you he means nothing to Islam anymore. You're stuck between a rock and a hard place here.

I believe prophet muhammad (pbuh) was a prophet of god. And I don't believe god found young marriages unethical back then. I believe god works with man-made cultural norms. Also, he didn't teach people pedophilia, young marriages were already a norm set in place in 7th century arabia.. so again, your wrong.

Screw the conjucture you believe. Inorder for this to work you have to first PROVE GOD. This can not be done in a scentific method so don't even bother bring it back up, your primative conjuctured beliefs on God are factless. Plus you're an atheist now correct? or do you have split personalities one believes in God and the other wants to be an atheist? What we have here is what islam claims is their insightful islamic leader/founder named muhammad, who was without question a pedophile who choose to pratice and advocate the teachings of pedophilia on a prepubescent child.

The law states as soon as the girl has her first period cycle.

I see. so without question a period is what makes a 6, 7, 8, 9, or even 10 year old child an adult. lol!

I'm pretty sure you copied and pasted that information from this website:
http://www.islam-watch.org/AyeshaAhm...-Practised.htmSince it says the exact same thing you posted. Muhammad (pbuh) did not do any of those things before the age of nine (before she was pubescent, before he consummated his marriage with her.[/b

They were verses describing the molestation that took place long before he had intercourse with her, should I of typed the verses out instead? Actually he did according to those verses. Same link from above only to explain this part:
http://youtube.com/watchv=E_nLuWLeRLE&feature=related

"Stop blindly copying and pasting lies off biased and hateful websites"

Fallacy from Ad hom Argument.

[menaz]

Originally Posted by Thrilla-Ali

Sahih Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 62, Number 64 (most reliable and most prestigious of the collections of hadith.) Narrated 'Aisha: "that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years" (i.e. till his death)."
^ That's a translational error.
The same verse you quoted, but this time in arabic
'Aishah, may God be pleased with her, narrated that the Prophet (P) was betrothed (zawaj) to her when she was six years old and he consummated (nikah) his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years. (Saheeh al-Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 62, Number 64)
"Zawaj" in arabic means engagement. The "Nikkah" means marriage in arabic.

it's about time to used this line of BS. I was starting to think it would never come. The good old it's a "translational error from arabic enters the discourse" though I purposely backed it up with another verse by Hisham's father which I posted inorder to support it further to concur no mistranslation. Like I said you are speaking a Half-truth. And your propagandizng that guys dishonesty when it comes to calling it a mistranslation.

There is also another verse narrated by Aisha...
Volume 7, Book 62, Number 65:
Narrated 'Aisha: that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old. Hisham said: I have been informed that 'Aisha remained with the Prophet for nine years (i.e. till his death)." what you know of the Quran (by heart)'

In arabic: An Ayeshath AnnaNabiyya Sallallahu alaihi vasallama thazawwajaha vahiya binthu Sitha sineena, va bana biha vahiya binthu This”I sineen. Qala Hisham : Va unbiethu Annaha kanath Indahu This”I Sineen.

http://www.wikiislam.org/wiki/Consummate
"sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 64 Narrated 'Aisha : that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old. An Ayeshath Radhiyallahu Anha : AnnaNnabiyya Sallallahu Alaihi Vasallama Thazawwajaha vahiya binthu sitha sineen, va udkhilath alaihi vahiya binthu this’in.
{In this hadith, the word “udkhilath’ was translated by Dr Mohsin Khan to mean “consummated his marriage’.}

Some Muslims claim that Muhammed “zawaj”ed Ayesha when she was six and “nikah”ed her when she was nine years old (for example, AbdurRahman Squires in http://www.islamic-awareness.org/Polemics/aishah.html). They thus posit zawaj to mean betrothal and nikah to mean marriage. In this way, some Muslims claim that Dr Mohsin Khan”s “poor” translation of nikah as “consummation of marriage” instead of just “marriage” had inadvertently raised a sexual connotation when none was intended.
The Arabic text shows this reasoning to be false : Bukhari used zawaj and nikah interchangeably as synonyms to mean marriage (as does the Quran in verses 33 : 37, 44 : 54 & 52 : 20). Secondly, according to the hadith the relevant word was not “nikah” (which does not appear in [Bukhari]] 7 : 62 : 64) but udkhilath.
The root of the verb “udkhilath” is “dakhala” which means to “enter”. This is the common Arabic meaning though there are other definitions, none of which can be made to fit with the context of the hadith above."

it's not a mistranslation, perhaps the guy from your source add his own mistranslation following the oath of Taqqiyah.

In any case, even if you want to argue this further, there's no denying it was an engagement. He signed the contract at 6, and he consummated his marriage with her at the age of 9 (that's when she started living with him). He waited until she was pubescent, and then consummated his marriage with her. Keeping in mind the ideas of "political correctness" and "absolute morality", in both Biblical and Quranic times the age at which a girl could marry was puberty. So even the cultural norm during those days supports this claim (that only pubescent girls could be wedded to a man. To be betrothed or engaged doesn't require the girl to be pubescent, in that case). Keep in mind that, during those days, when you consummate a marriage, that's when the marriage becomes official. And that's why Aicha started living with Muhammad (pbuh) then after (after the marriage was consummated). I don't even know why I'm arguing about this with you, it has nothing to do with the topic at hand really. It's a red-harring on your part.

I don't deny her forced enegagement took place at 6 years of age though, I Also don't deny unlike you that the forced marriage took place when she was 6 years old as well. And you shouldn't either (see above). That is what I meant by HALF-TRUTH. Correct muhammad finally did consumate( meaning he had intercourse with her) during the already existent marriage when she turned nine and it took place at his house. i.e. the marriage already existed but he didn't consumate it until she was nine, at his house. She wasn't to move in with him until she was nine that was the arrangement. The other point being he molested her up until this time. And no it's not a red-herring it's exactly on topic.

[menaz]

It doesn't matter how explicit you try to get with your argument, fact of the matter is, it was a norm back at that time. We are far from grasping the norms of 7th century Arabia because we weren't born and raised in 7th century Arabia, plain and simple.

How am I making it explicit? I'm not the 54 year old islamic leader named muhammad here who molested a six year old prepubsent gril then had sexual intercourse with her when she was a prepubsent nine year old. Actually alot of you muslims really aren't that far from the norms of the 7th century when it comes to this subject being considered acceptable practice today. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tz3I9hhCXCI

`Aisha was not the first case, for many girls married at her same age to men who were at their fathers’ age. Hala, the cousin of Amina bint Wahb was married to Abdul-Muttalib on the same day his son `Abdullah married Aminah bint Wahb who was at Hala’s same age. Also, the Companion `Umar ibn Al-Khattab married the daughter of Ali ibn Abi Talib, may Allah honor his face, while he was at her grandpa’s age.

So this wasn't the first case of pedophilia? Because you known after all they did as muhammad did. Still trying to justify pedophilia? I think we are past the point were I give a shit who else did it don't you think so? I've made my argument pretty clear correct? He should of condemend pedophilia, it's obvious you don't think he was insightful or a profound prophet of allah as your religion islam claims. So which is one more important to you allah being a pedophile or allah being a prophet? This is the paradigm you've created for yourself.

Yea you keep thinking that.

Actually you should learn to understand what I think you might just leave islam behind or at the very least stop being a apologist and learn to accept the harsh reality without the bullshit. i.e. you'll stop contradicting yourself.

Pedophilia is categorized in the DSM-IV thereby making it a mental disorder. Why is it classified as a mental disorder? Because it is a behavior that diverges from commonly expressed behavior in the population. Pedophiles knowingly have the intent to not only break the law, but also break the social norms of a society by having sexual relations with little girls/boys. Pedophiles hurt and even kill their victims as well, a behavior which was not practiced by the prophet Muhammad (pbuh) or Abraham (pbuh). I believe that young marriages shouldn't be practiced (because of the culture/norm i was raised in), and that it's not suitable in todays world.

So your excuse is Muhammad had a mental disorder therefore couldn't help it? Yet alot of others in your culture still practice it as the accepted norm today because of muhammad, and it's not considered a offense for jail time.

However, some places are still quite primitive even today (where this practice is still a cultural norm), and what's "wrong" and "right" in relation to this issue is still subjective to different people coming from different cultures.

So in other words you still advocate pedophilia if it's considered the social norm? See the problem with this yet?

According to your train of thought, everyone in biblical times, and the middle ages, and in late 19th century America were "pedophiles", because they all condoned young marriages and fornication with young women.

Harsh realities but I condem them.

As a matter of fact, the government of Holland is ran by "pedophiles" today, since the legal age of sexual consent there is 12 years old (In Ontario, Canada it's 16 and in British Columbia, Canada it's 14. In Holland it's 12 years old, 14 in Italy (where menaz is from), France 15, Germany 16, Ireland 17, UK 16) - i know i repeated this many times but it needs some repition in this case..

You are correct that is how it is written under the age consent law, but today by defacto most adults don't practice it in the west and any that do should go to jail for it. The age of consent laws should be changed just for the record so pedophiles don't try to claim it's acceptable. Yeah I agree any adult who acts on most of those consent laws is infact a pedophile.

As a matter of fact, the Byzantine emperors and nobility were all "pedophiles" too because Child brides as young as 8 were common among them, right Menaz?

FYI:There is a difference between sexual intercourse with a nine yearold and being an eight year old bride for poilitical leverage. Though nonetheless I would consider it a form of pedophilia peddling.

What's "bad" is subjective. It wasn't "bad" to the Semites in biblical times, for example, and that's the whole issue here. We have evolved since those times, and our culture here is much different. We have to learn to except the differences of the past, and in some cases even the present

Actually whats bad is bad. A pedophile knows it's bad but they do it anyway regardless if it's a norm or not. God is subjective. If you wish to be labeled an advocate for pedophiles I have no problem with calling you a advocate for pedophiles. The other problem is you believe in god not evolution. I believe not all of us have evolved which is why you must denounce these teachings of muhammad like I am for correcting some of the age of consent laws.

What made "sense" to people of the past does not necessarily make sense to us now. It may have worked in the past, but not now in other words, at least not in my opinion. We are living in the 21st century after all. We are far from grasping the norms of 7th century Arabia because we weren't born and raised in 7th century Arabia, and i believe god was okay with certain man-made norms of the past, the primitive cultures of an age-old.

How could your Omniscient God not foresee the future of this degenerate beginning and trend? You might as well claim pedophilia has been here since Allah ordained it therefore noreason to question his authority on the matter. i.e. your just saying pedophilia will always be the norm no matter the century.

[Thrilla-Ali]

Originally Posted by menaz

I don't deny her forced enegagement took place at 6 years of age though, I Also don't deny unlike you that the forced marriage took place when she was 6 years old as well. And you shouldn't either (see above). That is what I meant by HALF-TRUTH. Correct muhammad finally did consumate( meaning he had intercourse with her) during the already existent marriage when she turned nine and it took place at his house. i.e. the marriage already existed but he didn't consumate it until she was nine, at his house. She wasn't to move in with him until she was nine that was the arrangement. The other point being he molested her up until this time. And no it's not a red-herring it's exactly on topic.

Well , judging from the culture at that time, it was an engagement.
Marriage contract signed> she hits puberty> marriage gets consummated.
This is subjective, i find it to be an engagement before she hit puberty.
Also, you said it was a "forced" marriage, which it was not. Abu Bakr had accepted the proposal.

Originally Posted by menaz

The other point being he molested her up until this time. And no it's not a red-herring it's exactly on topic.

I'm still awaiting for your proof that he did any sexual acts with her before the age of nine.

We are arguing over whether Muhammad (pbuh) was engaged to her at 6 or married her at 6. That's not "exactly on topic" btw.

Originally Posted by menaz

How am I making it explicit? I'm not the 54 year old islamic leader named muhammad here who molested a six year old prepubsent gril then had sexual intercourse with her when she was a prepubsent nine year old. Actually alot of you muslims really aren't that far from the norms of the 7th century when it comes to this subject being considered acceptable practice today.

Well, like i said, it was not only normal to him, but Aicha and her parents too. You can't blame people for being born into certain norms. If you were born in those norms, you would be a "pedophile" too.

Originally Posted by menaz

So your excuse is Muhammad had a mental disorder therefore couldn't help it? Yet alot of others in your culture still practice it as the accepted norm today because of muhammad, and it's not considered a offense for jail time.

A pedophile breaks the cultural norms. Muhammad (pbuh) did not. I never said Muhammad (pbuh) had a mental disorder. To consider someone a 'pedophile' because the cultural norms were set in that way, is subjective.

Originally Posted by menaz

So in other words you still advocate pedophilia if it's considered the social norm? See the problem with this yet?

Again, never said i advocated it. I said it was subjective. If its normal to some indigenous african tribe in the middle of africa, i can't chastise them for practicing young marriages because it's normal to them. However, since i was born in Canadian culture and norms, i would consider it wrong. I'm saying it's subjective, i don't advocate pedophilia, im not in favor of it nor do i support it. However, just because i define young marriages to be "wrong" doesn't mean it is wrong, because what's 'wrong' and 'right' is subjective, and varies from culture to culture. What's "wrong" to you or me could be "right" to them, in other words.

Originally Posted by menaz

Harsh realities but I condem them.

If you lived during those days, you would be no different.

Originally Posted by menaz

You are correct that is how it is written under the age consent law, but today by defacto most adults don't practice it in the west and any that do should go to jail for it. The age of consent laws should be changed just for the record so pedophiles don't try to claim it's acceptable. Yeah I agree any adult who acts on most of those consent laws is infact a pedophile.

So what age should be the consent in your opinion? 16, 17, 18, 19? Again, it's subjective, it varies from culture to culture.

Originally Posted by menaz

FYI:There is a difference between sexual intercourse with a nine yearold and being an eight year old bride for poilitical leverage. Though nonetheless I would consider it a form of pedophilia peddling.

Menaz, they had sex with these young girls. When it come to the subject at hand, there is no difference.

Originally Posted by menaz

Actually whats bad is bad. A pedophile knows it's bad but they do it anyway regardless if it's a norm or not. God is subjective. If you wish to be labeled an advocate for pedophiles I have no problem with calling you a advocate for pedophiles. The other problem is you believe in god not evolution. I believe not all of us have evolved which is why you must denounce these teachings of muhammad like I am for correcting some of the age of consent laws.

No, people didn't find it "bad" at all at that time. Otherwise, people would speak out against it, and the practice would be abolished. It was a norm that everyone accepted, it was something every one was accustomed too, including the bride herself and the much older groom.

Originally Posted by menaz

How could your Omniscient God not foresee the future of this degenerate beginning and trend? You might as well claim pedophilia has been here since Allah ordained it therefore noreason to question his authority on the matter. i.e. your just saying pedophilia will always be the norm no matter the century.

Allah (swa) does not change, people do. Young marriages were a man made norm, not something god created. Although man accepted it at that time, many cultures no longer accept it now. I think religion adapts with culture, and the cultural norm we're living in now is not only against this practice, but it's highly objected and frowned upon, people are in disfavor of it in our vicinity (therefore it shouldn't be practiced in our culture). This is a teaching in accordance with Islam.
The laws of the land you're living in must be followed, and religion adapts with cultural customs (people find it ethical to marry at a much higher age now in our culture).

[Thrilla-Ali]

Originally Posted by menaz

No she wasn't. You did not follow yet again.
Number 1.) the fact he molested her when she was six.
Number 2.) the fact she was still playing with dolls at six, seven, eight, and nine which means she was still prepubescent.
Number 3.) the argument of morality which was muhammad having sex with a nine year old is not the same as having sex with a adult women. (their emotional maturity can't handle it nor is it equivalent.)

1) Prove that he did any sexual acts with her before the age of nine.

2) Just because she plays with dolls means she isn't pubescent? Some logic you got there.

3) It was the norm

Originally Posted by menaz

1.) that doesn't include Aisha. 2.) Sex with a pubesscent nine year old whether it is the norm or not does not make it morally right for any cultural at any time in history. A childs mind can not handle that responseablity. ( I made my stance very clear to you in my first response try following.) 3.) once again you have tried to justify pedophilia.

Again, what's morally "wrong" and "right" is subjective and varies from culture to culture. In with regards to the said culture of 7th century Arabia, it was "right" to them and they obviously didn't have a problem with it. Therefore, you can't chastise them for following their own cultural norms just because it doesn't fit under your scope. It was normal to them.

Originally Posted by menaz

Caught you in another lie. another contradiction. You said before the parents didn't object. You're own words: "Her parents accepted". You tried to hide this little fact. You just admitted Muhammad breaks taboos such as marring a daughter of a friend/brother. Which tells me it doesn't matter whether something was the norm or not because Muhammad would do as he pleased as long as it benefited/pleased him. Like I said Abu Bakr couldn't really stand up to the leader of islam even though he disagreed with the marriage and tried to convice muhammad to marry the daughter of Hamza. And once again you try to justify her pedophilia. Here is someone who actually can translate arabic unlike you who does nothing but commits Taqqiyah.

This is yet another red herring by you, because you diverted from the actual subject in debate. You're arguing whether Abu bakr wanted Muhammad (pbuh) to marry Aicha or not. This is not the subject at hand. Abu Bakr did not reject prophet muhammad (pbuh) proposal because of his age, so what's your point?
I've already told you that Aicha was to be betrothed to another old man, which was Jubair ibn mut'am prior to prophet muhammad's (pbuh) intervention.

Originally Posted by menaz

Actually Pedophilia does harm the child, psychology would label it stockholm syndrome.
The point was murder, corruption, pedophilia, and greed has been accepted by mass mobs before (however all four harmfully affect in their own ways) You're illogically proclaiming pedophilia is fine and dandy not harmful but these other acts are.I see, so if pedophilia doesn't cause harm according to you that makes it ok? You're thought process is so immorally twisted by your religion on this subject your blinded but I expected as much. Islamic religion makes no sense morally.

Nice try, but it wasn't stockholm syndrome because it was the norm back then. How can you define it as stockholm syndrome when everyone considered it normal back in primitive times? You're implying that everyone had stockholm syndrome back then, because young marriages were considered common and ordinary to everyone back then. If everyone had stockholm syndrome, then who was the perpetrator? Truth be told, it was not only a wide spread practice, but an average practice that everyone considered normal. So then why would you attack people living in those norms? Also, did the prophet (pbuh) know himself that he was doing something "wrong?" So then where's the intent? Again, cultural norm..

It's considered Stockholm syndrome in our culture because our cultural norms are different than 7th century arabia and biblical times. It's not normal for a old man to see a pubescent girl in our culture, and if she gets attached to him, that would be stockholm syndrome. Understand the difference.

My stance on this remains as it always has, it didn't hurt or startle anyone back then.

[Thrilla-Ali]

Originally Posted by menaz

The other thing I find illogical about your line of thought here is you think pedophilia was morally ok as long as it's desired by the mass mob.

No, not the "mass mob"

It was a cultural norm in biblical times which took place in the middle east, but the practice of young marriages was not limited to the middle east, it was also present on all continents during those days. It was not "desired" but considered a norm by people who lived during these ages. I never said pedophilia was morally okay, i said that young marriages were a norm during those days and you shouldn't patronize people living at those times because it was normal to them. I am saying that what's "wrong" and "right" is subjective, and that you can't always expect things to fit in your scope.

Originally Posted by menaz

You do infact advocate pedophilia today by not denouncing muhammads teachings which advocated it

Muhammad (pbuh) never taught pedophilia. He never advocated pedophilia either (you need to check the definition of "advocated" *cough*)

Originally Posted by menaz

The Quran says to slay men who lay with men i.e. To kill homosexuals. Yet alot of muslims follow and do as their islamic leader muhammad did when it comes to pedophilia. You obviously have no problems with murder or pedophilia then.

This is yet another red harring and illogical argument. I don't think prophet Muhammad's (pbuh) marriage to Aicha did any harm to anyone back then, including Aicha herself since it was the norm. However, murder does do harm, obviously. Again, that's the difference.

Originally Posted by menaz

It's about your religion "islam" which claims muhammad to be insightfully profound. You're dancing around this issue because you know I'm correct. Islam claims muhammad to be a brilliant man correct? You think muhammad was a genius correct? I definitely wouldn't label him an average man since he created his own religion and got alot of arabs to follow as he did. This tells me he could minpulate. And Islam tells me he can invent his own form of reiligion to support his monotheistic allah inorder to reform his old tribe of pagan Arabs to it yet he can not condem pedophilia?

Same old argument. How can he "prevent" young marriages when it was considered normal in the first place? Especially if it wasn't harming anyone at the time? Obviously, burying infants is doing harm, and that's why he abolished that practice. Young marriages were a norm even before biblical times, let alone the 7th century. People didn't think it was "abuse" and neither did Muhammad (pbuh) or Aicha, therefore you have no argument. As for Muhammad (pbuh) being "brilliant" enough to "change" the norm, who said it was a problem to begin with to anyone at that time? Why "solve" a problem that doesn't exist?

Young marriages were being practiced even during shakespears time (and countless others), did the 'brilliant' shakespear speak against the practice of young marriage? Did any "brilliant minded" historical figure speak against young marriages during those ages? No.. because no-one had a problem with it. Young marriages were also the norm during the times of Jesus, moses, and all the other monotheistic prophets (pbut) did they speak against it, answer is no... fact of the matter is, young marriages didn't hurt or startle anyone, there was no problem with it, it was the norm. Just because the perspective of people living in the 7th century doesn't fit into your scope, doesn't mean it's okay to attack them with your words.

You're the one dancing around in circles, not me btw.

Originally Posted by menaz

Without question you have no problem advocating his acts of pedophilia. Are you saying Muhammad was not a prophet of allah? Have you turned your back on islam? Well if you think he's nothing more than a average man then why do you care if he is labeled a Pedophile? Obviously according to you he means nothing to Islam anymore. You're stuck between a rock and a hard place here.

Umm.. what are you talking about? I think your just a defeatist. You can call me an "appologetic" if it makes you feel better but it won't take away any truth on the matter. I said, if you (not me) think he's an average man living in those days, then you can't blame him for the norms he was born in to. If you were born in 7th century Arabia, you would be a "pedophile" too menaz or at least support pedophilia, since young marriages were the norm then. Bottom line..