Razor Xtreme
Well-Known Member
^^ and can you explain why it's not, so that I won't make the same mistake in the future?
-
Hi all. We have had reports of member's signatures being edited to include malicious content. You can rest assured this wasn't done by staff and we can find no indication that the forums themselves have been compromised.
However, remember to keep your passwords secure. If you use similar logins on multiple sites, people and even bots may be able to access your account.
We always recommend using unique passwords and enable two-factor authentication if possible. Make sure you are secure. -
Be sure to join the discussion on our discord at: Discord.gg/serebii
Muhammed and Pedophilia
- Thread starter Woobatgirl
- Start date
- Status
Snorunt conservationist
Banned
Just read the posts back.
Razor Xtreme
Well-Known Member
I did. Still see nothing wrong with my examples.
Example 1: Animals are pets to us now, in a 100 years, people can think that having pets is sick. We use some animals for heavy lifting (horses, mules, etc.) we breed animals simply for food (Cows, pigs, etc.), and that's ok to us now. But maybe in a 100 years, people will think that this is sick, disgusting, and hell, they may even see it the way we see slavery now.
Example 2: An 18 year old dating a 16 year old. Ok, this one might have been a little off, but this one was purely given to support the argument that what is ok now could be wrong later, nothing more or less. I have friends that are 15-17 dating 20-25 year olders, nothing wrong there IMO.
Example 1: Animals are pets to us now, in a 100 years, people can think that having pets is sick. We use some animals for heavy lifting (horses, mules, etc.) we breed animals simply for food (Cows, pigs, etc.), and that's ok to us now. But maybe in a 100 years, people will think that this is sick, disgusting, and hell, they may even see it the way we see slavery now.
Example 2: An 18 year old dating a 16 year old. Ok, this one might have been a little off, but this one was purely given to support the argument that what is ok now could be wrong later, nothing more or less. I have friends that are 15-17 dating 20-25 year olders, nothing wrong there IMO.
I am merely responding to what you have posted. I'm not assuming anything.
Your posts act as an illustration of your views unless, of course, you are a troll.
We're not in the debate forum yet. I have no problems with controversial statements, only poor logic used to back them up. I'm a writing tutor.
I'm a writing tutor. Though I do frequent the ivory tower from time to time I'm not being the least bit politically correct here; I just expect you to bring a substance to your debate and articulate your points more thoroughly.
And you should understand that there are many different types of Islam that correspond to different locations just like there are Christianity.
To present these statements as true for all followers of Islam is as absurd as me stating that all Christians believe in transubstantiation. It's hard to make a statement that all modern Muslims believe in the dehumanization of women just as it is difficult to make a statement that all modern Christians believe women deserve a submissive role in a relationship.
I believe Jigglychu and I had a discussion about Christianity and women months ago, and we both agreed? that though the Christianity as a whole has not been historically kind and empowering to women and at times has been used and still is occasionally used (by more the more bizarre) for the repression of women, there is no reason to label all Christians as sexist or say that all Christians follow such a belief.
I'm not whining; I'm critiquing and scrutinizing your posts and arguments and if you want to be taken seriously here or in the debate section (which this will inevitably end up in) the burden of proof is on you to back up your claims. If you are so upset that your argument doesn't hold up to logical scrutiny, maybe this isn't the place for you to post.
You may very well not be writing an essay, but that does not excuse you from logical fallacies.
Your attempt to write off my posts as "politically correct" and therefore irrelevant is a rather interesting and cute ad hominen but nothing more.
EDIT: Quite honestly, you should be thanking me for making the weak argument stronger. If you actually listened to my criticisms and elaborated on your points and did less generalizing, your argument would become stronger. I'm providing my service for you FOR FREE!
Last edited:
I guess most people would say that in those times, it would have been perfectly normal to be married at a young age and have up to four wives. (or whatever the number was) The point is that Muhammed is still looked up to as a great man in these times, and that is a bit barbaric in my opinion. Having sexual relationships with children will be frowned upon in these days, so to look up to someone who did this, even if it was many years ago, it's sick.
Some people in these days still have more than one wife, and that to me is quite sickening too, and does NOT portray equality. Equality being something that almost every holy book talks about, but is a complete lie and not followed. Some people need to think without bringing religion into everything.
Some people in these days still have more than one wife, and that to me is quite sickening too, and does NOT portray equality. Equality being something that almost every holy book talks about, but is a complete lie and not followed. Some people need to think without bringing religion into everything.
Auraninja
Eh, ragazzo!
I believe Jigglychu brought up this quote.
Yeah, answer me this, how is that different then Christianity? A lot of Christians will blindly defend themselves by saying the Earth is 10,000 years old and that would have to make Creation possible. You think other religions don't have some crap to go with their belief systems. I urge you to reconsider this.
He/She never said that Christians, or any other religious people, aren't the same. This thread was made to discuss Muhammed and his actions, and so Islam is being discussed.
And this brings us back to the Sagan quote and the Greek example.
Auraninja
Eh, ragazzo!
If the sources were so blatantly Islam hate sites (meaning sites dedicated to hating Islam), then I question what reliable sources do we have to really argue this to begin with. Get a site that is neither that nor a wiki and we may have something to at least discuss.
Secondly, why is this not a debate forum? Did it possibly didn't make the cut? I wouldn't have let it exist for debate if the sources are not credible.
Last edited:
Snorunt conservationist
Banned
Tres bien. You have it. This is simply an implausible scenario. People will never tire of screwing people roughly their own age. I literally cannot fathom a scenario where this would occur. Honestly. The pet scenario you can at least think about.
Last edited:
Whut?
You think atheists should be protesting outside churches?
Or did you just make a typo?
Razor Xtreme
Well-Known Member
^^^ Ah, well glad this got settled then. xD
UltimatePokemonExpert
Experienced Trainer
I'm a Christian and I think this is over exagguration. Back then, I thought it was legal to marry that young. I don't have the full story though, so... yeah.
Technically, it still is, though I (hope) it's frowned upon.
You see, there is no age limit to when you can have sex in many Islamic countries, but you must be married before you do.
Korusan
Banned
It was a jab at how most teenagers who say they're atheists on the internet wouldn't have the balls to storm a religious institution like they make it seem they would.
Fair enough, but I highly doubt those sort of actions would further their cause.
Most religious people already distrust them as it is, no need to strengthen that image with extremist behaviour.
Last edited:
I cant see how this should be taken as a attack on all of Islam, Muhammad had alot of questionable actions through out his life, no doubt. But if you focus on his message, and ignore some of the crap, there shouldn't be a problem. If anything we should encourage and praise the moderates in Islam that have shrugged off some of the more radical things.
That all being said, those saying that this would be fine in that time. Er.. I am not so sure. Sure there were alot of child marriages back then, but I think I would be hard pressed to find one that was started off at 6, except for a arranged marriage between two kids. And also remember that marriage still more than likely did not happen till 12 or later ( Or when they bloomed as referenced back then including in the Koran ). We ingest alot of chemicals now that brings on puberty at a younger age. There would be no real reason to have sex at the age of 9, because unlike now, back then puberty did not actually start till around the age of 14, with 12 being the youngest.
It is creepy by our standards, and realistically more than likely it was very creepy by their standards back then too. But again you can't damn a whole religion now for that, especially when you have so many who actively cut out the bad stuff of Islam.
That all being said, those saying that this would be fine in that time. Er.. I am not so sure. Sure there were alot of child marriages back then, but I think I would be hard pressed to find one that was started off at 6, except for a arranged marriage between two kids. And also remember that marriage still more than likely did not happen till 12 or later ( Or when they bloomed as referenced back then including in the Koran ). We ingest alot of chemicals now that brings on puberty at a younger age. There would be no real reason to have sex at the age of 9, because unlike now, back then puberty did not actually start till around the age of 14, with 12 being the youngest.
It is creepy by our standards, and realistically more than likely it was very creepy by their standards back then too. But again you can't damn a whole religion now for that, especially when you have so many who actively cut out the bad stuff of Islam.
Last edited:
Quite often children were promised at a young age and married at a young age. Though you are right to point out puberty happens at an earlier age for us, it still doesn't change that the practice of marrying prepubescent girls occurred and was common in that area pre-Islam.
Also, although we are experiencing puberty at earlier ages thanks to being pumped full of sweet chemicals, I would like to point out that back then more was expected of children at earlier ages in most cultures.
Cultural differences sure are horrible huh.
I daresay people should be more concerned with something happening now - the catholic church systematically shutting down anything that incriminates their followers for the molestation of young boys that has been going on over the last thirty years, where such an act has definitely been considered by the wider world as morally reprehensible.
Unless you are a historian or whatever with an accurate vision with evidence of the culture during the time of Mohammed you cannot really make an arguement for or against what the OP brings up with any defining accuracy. It's a thought experiment if nothing else, and while you may or may not think it's morally reprehensible, it doesn't really matter. Consider;
[img139]http://i.imgur.com/yvmg3.jpg[/img139]
You might also want to look at this link; http://www.avert.org/age-of-consent.htm
The bulk of the world lists Age of Consent at 16+, however even in this day and age there do exist countries that consider Age of Consent to be a number less than 12, and that's fine. I don't care for women that aren't older than half my age +7 personally but that's just me. What you need to come to terms with is the fact that what may be morally reprehensible or indeed the law in Western countries does not hold true for the world at large. Again, it goes back to cultural differences.
Now can we consider focusing on the Catholic church instead, because their activities are wholly illegal if nothing else.
I daresay people should be more concerned with something happening now - the catholic church systematically shutting down anything that incriminates their followers for the molestation of young boys that has been going on over the last thirty years, where such an act has definitely been considered by the wider world as morally reprehensible.
Unless you are a historian or whatever with an accurate vision with evidence of the culture during the time of Mohammed you cannot really make an arguement for or against what the OP brings up with any defining accuracy. It's a thought experiment if nothing else, and while you may or may not think it's morally reprehensible, it doesn't really matter. Consider;
[img139]http://i.imgur.com/yvmg3.jpg[/img139]
You might also want to look at this link; http://www.avert.org/age-of-consent.htm
The bulk of the world lists Age of Consent at 16+, however even in this day and age there do exist countries that consider Age of Consent to be a number less than 12, and that's fine. I don't care for women that aren't older than half my age +7 personally but that's just me. What you need to come to terms with is the fact that what may be morally reprehensible or indeed the law in Western countries does not hold true for the world at large. Again, it goes back to cultural differences.
Now can we consider focusing on the Catholic church instead, because their activities are wholly illegal if nothing else.
- Status