You talk like you knew this Aisha. Admit it, you can't defend the fact that your Mohammad was a pedophile. A pedohpile is someone who is sexually attracted to children. A nine year old girl is a child. You Muslims believe mohammad was perfect, well folks just look into the character of Mohammad and you'll see how perfect he was. He was a perfect mobster and conman.GipsyeyesWell facts are facts, you also talk like you've seen Aisha in real life.
Any questions on Islam?
This topic is locked from further discussion.
[QUOTE="Gipsyeyes"]I've got a question for you. How can you justify your "prophet" Mohammad being a pedophile? Here's proof for people who don't know about Islam's so called prophet marrying a 9 year old girl called Aisha, and consummating the marriage at the age of 9. Check this out:Mohammad was a pedophile
rimnet00
It was the normal in those times to marry young, considering life expectancyin that time period.
With that said. The sources on Wikipedia that claim such a thing happened, is from unsound Hadith and Watt, who uses these Hadith as proof, and is also an Islamophobe. Hence, there is no proof of such a thing to begin with.
What is unsound about that hadith?
Why should the views of Watt be discarded simply because of their outcome? Why would these views make Watt and Islamaphobe? Surely, you could respond with some factual evidence to back up your assertion?
[QUOTE="Gipsyeyes"]I've got a question for you. How can you justify your "prophet" Mohammad being a pedophile? Here's proof for people who don't know about Islam's so called prophet marrying a 9 year old girl called Aisha, and consummating the marriage at the age of 9. Check this out:Mohammad was a pedophile
rimnet00
It was the normal in those times to marry young, considering life expectancyin that time period.
With that said. The sources on Wikipedia that claim such a thing happened, is from unsound Hadith and Watt, who uses these Hadith as proof, and is also an Islamophobe. Hence, there is no proof of such a thing to begin with.
The fact is you have 50 year old guy (Mohammad) marrying a 9 year old (Aisha). If both were children, I would've understood. But a 50 year old guy who goes around wanting to marry a 9 year old, come off it, that's not normal.
[QUOTE="hagiiiiiiiiii"][QUOTE="Gipsyeyes"]First please go study what pedophile is. For your question i think you meant, How can you justify your "prophet" Mohammed NOTbeing a pedophile?I've got a question for you. How can you justify your "prophet" Mohammad being a pedophile? Here's proof for people who don't know about Islam's so called prophet marrying a 9 year old girl called Aisha, and consummating the marriage at the age of 9. Check this out:Mohammad was a pedophile
The_Ish
Aisha had completely gone through her menstrual cycle at the age of 9, ( let me refer to you that in England the average age is 18, in France it's 17, in holland it's 12) so these are just arbitrary numbers thrown around, so her body was not at the age of a 9 year old but rather around 20 year old girl who has fully developed her body. Not just physically but her sharpness at the age of 9 was crystal claer, she was profound of remembering many hadith's and teaching them to the general women in public.
First of all, that is impossible. She is not an adult in any way possible, so "consumating" with a 9 year old is pedophilia. These numbers are not arbitrary, they are chosen because they are thought to determine a certain level of physicial and mental maturity. And remembering prayers/hadiths does not mean one has a sharp mind - it only means they are good at remembering. Any 9 year old can do that.
Why is it that whenever there are facts that disprove your arguements, you guys consider them impossible. It is possible for people to evolve through monkeys but it is not possible for a 9 year old girl to be mature enough in every sense. You're logic only applies to things which benefit your arguements.[QUOTE="rimnet00"][QUOTE="Gipsyeyes"]I've got a question for you. How can you justify your "prophet" Mohammad being a pedophile? Here's proof for people who don't know about Islam's so called prophet marrying a 9 year old girl called Aisha, and consummating the marriage at the age of 9. Check this out:Mohammad was a pedophile
Gipsyeyes
It was the normal in those times to marry young, considering life expectancyin that time period.
With that said. The sources on Wikipedia that claim such a thing happened, is from unsound Hadith and Watt, who uses these Hadith as proof, and is also an Islamophobe. Hence, there is no proof of such a thing to begin with.
The fact is you have 50 year old guy (Mohammad) marrying a 9 year old (Aisha). If both were children, I would've understood. But a 50 year old guy who goes around wanting to marry a 9 year old, come off it, that's not normal.
Think of it this way, 50 year old man wanting to marry a 20 year old lady who is more intelligent then any other women in that era.
[QUOTE="rimnet00"][QUOTE="Gipsyeyes"]I've got a question for you. How can you justify your "prophet" Mohammad being a pedophile? Here's proof for people who don't know about Islam's so called prophet marrying a 9 year old girl called Aisha, and consummating the marriage at the age of 9. Check this out:Mohammad was a pedophile
Gipsyeyes
It was the normal in those times to marry young, considering life expectancyin that time period.
With that said. The sources on Wikipedia that claim such a thing happened, is from unsound Hadith and Watt, who uses these Hadith as proof, and is also an Islamophobe. Hence, there is no proof of such a thing to begin with.
The fact is you have 50 year old guy (Mohammad) marrying a 9 year old (Aisha). If both were children, I would've understood. But a 50 year old guy who goes around wanting to marry a 9 year old, come off it, that's not normal.
It's not considered normal in our time, but it was a good deal more common back then. This doesn't mean it was any less harmful for the child, just that it was socially acceptable insome parts of the ancient world.
However, I find it surprising that someone who claimed to be so in touch with God would do such a thing.
[QUOTE="Gipsyeyes"][QUOTE="rimnet00"][QUOTE="Gipsyeyes"]I've got a question for you. How can you justify your "prophet" Mohammad being a pedophile? Here's proof for people who don't know about Islam's so called prophet marrying a 9 year old girl called Aisha, and consummating the marriage at the age of 9. Check this out:Mohammad was a pedophile
morewasabi
It was the normal in those times to marry young, considering life expectancyin that time period.
With that said. The sources on Wikipedia that claim such a thing happened, is from unsound Hadith and Watt, who uses these Hadith as proof, and is also an Islamophobe. Hence, there is no proof of such a thing to begin with.
The fact is you have 50 year old guy (Mohammad) marrying a 9 year old (Aisha). If both were children, I would've understood. But a 50 year old guy who goes around wanting to marry a 9 year old, come off it, that's not normal.
It's not considered normal in our time, but it was a good deal more common back then. This doesn't mean it was any less harmful for the child, just that it was socially acceptable insome parts of the ancient world.
However, I find it surprising that someone who claimed to be so in touch with God would do such a thing.
It's not that you find it surprising, it's just that you can't find any other way of insulting him without denying the facts that I have provided.
[QUOTE="rimnet00"][QUOTE="Gipsyeyes"]I've got a question for you. How can you justify your "prophet" Mohammad being a pedophile? Here's proof for people who don't know about Islam's so called prophet marrying a 9 year old girl called Aisha, and consummating the marriage at the age of 9. Check this out:Mohammad was a pedophile
RationalAtheist
It was the normal in those times to marry young, considering life expectancyin that time period.
With that said. The sources on Wikipedia that claim such a thing happened, is from unsound Hadith and Watt, who uses these Hadith as proof, and is also an Islamophobe. Hence, there is no proof of such a thing to begin with.
What is unsound about that hadith?
Why should the views of Watt be discarded simply because of their outcome? Why would these views make Watt and Islamaphobe? Surely, you could respond with some factual evidence to back up your assertion?
If you do a search on "Science of Hadith", you should be able to find some resources to better understand how the Hadith were compiled and how each entry was categorized. The Hadith which are used as sources to conclude that Aisha was 9 years old are not amongst the "sound/supported" Hadith, due to the nature by which they were obtained, and instead fall into the "weak" category.
The reason I disgard Watt's views is simply becaus he is an intermediate source, who does not provide anything new to the table. Instead he takes weak Hadith as truth, only to propagate his agenda.
The fact is, no one today, knows how old she was at the time of consumation. In fact, anyone who cares to research this topic will know that the age of consumation is unknown, but is estimated to be anywhere between 9 and 16.
I apologize for the bad quoting.
For your questions. Why not find a way to integrate with society without excluding the rights of religious beliefs? Is the society your talking about really that ignorant about respecting peoples beliefs and understanding them? Really, you make it seem like it's impossible for a society to integrate when there are people from diffferent religions and cultures. The head scarf does come from Quran, there is no need to argue about facts.hagiiiiiiiiii
Its hard, as religious beliefs are irrational. If I believed that painting my ears red and carrying a big stick around was my religious right, should that be allowed outside my home and front garden? If religious demands require those of that faith to visibly identify themselves, I'd say it would erode the cohesion that bids society and places barriers to understanding and communication between people. Rather, for fear of alienating, offending, or demarking sections of society, we should cater to the lowest common denominator - that of making the legal position entirely neutral towards religious desires.
In a schoolroom full of French schoolchildren, would you like to be easily able to identify all the Muslims? Why?
Surely, if the headscarf comes from the Koran, you have the facts to back it up.... I challenge you!
Okay so you've a Muslim trying to defend 50 year old Mohammad marrying a 9 year old. I've got another question. Why did your Mohammad destroy the Jewish tribe of Banu Quraiza? Eigtht hundred Jewish men were murdered under Mohammad's orders, their women taken as sex slaves, and their children as slaves too.
Actually, I have the answer: It was because they rfeused to convert to Islam!
What about the historical conquest of Islam? After Mohammad's death his successors just carried on with the conquest he started?
Its a fact that Islam was mainly spread by force, unlike Christianity which spread generally voluntarily. Now im not saying people were killed if they did not accept Islam, but they had less rights, and itwas inevitable if a country/kingdom fall to a different faith the populace will be converted.
Take for example the Crusades, im not saying they were right, but was it not a fair act of retaliation? Its long been considered that the Crusades were an event where "loads of evil westerners went to the middle east and started forcing Christianity on Muslims". But wasn't Jerusalem taken by force in 635(i think) in the first place from the Byzantine Empire? I mean most of the eastern world was Orthodox Christianity. But is it not true at exactly the same time you were conquering all over the world? Its a fact that the Pope did not call a Crusade because Jerusalem was partially import, but to draw in Islamic armies to take pressure off all of the other Christian kingdoms...
TakeSpain, what about the Islam conquest of Spain? Justification, for the conquest of all those Kingdoms? Even parts of southern France? It was said by Islamic conquerors at the time they wanted to sack Rome., tacking areas of southern France on the way. Egypt? Persia? India? Armenia (later genocide)? All of these places were taken by force And the Buddha's of east Asia?
Muslims make out that Christians are real b****** but what about these things, like Turkey would not exist without conquest.
Now im not saying that you were evil conquerors, but gaining an empire from Southern France to India does not come without war, and you can't say it was a big coincidence that you had a reason to attack everyone, and you were just defending yourselves or had justification for every conquest? Come on...
So do you admit Muslims were just ad bad? If not worst.
[QUOTE="The_Ish"][QUOTE="hagiiiiiiiiii"][QUOTE="Gipsyeyes"]First please go study what pedophile is. For your question i think you meant, How can you justify your "prophet" Mohammed NOTbeing a pedophile?I've got a question for you. How can you justify your "prophet" Mohammad being a pedophile? Here's proof for people who don't know about Islam's so called prophet marrying a 9 year old girl called Aisha, and consummating the marriage at the age of 9. Check this out:Mohammad was a pedophile
hagiiiiiiiiii
Aisha had completely gone through her menstrual cycle at the age of 9, ( let me refer to you that in England the average age is 18, in France it's 17, in holland it's 12) so these are just arbitrary numbers thrown around, so her body was not at the age of a 9 year old but rather around 20 year old girl who has fully developed her body. Not just physically but her sharpness at the age of 9 was crystal claer, she was profound of remembering many hadith's and teaching them to the general women in public.
First of all, that is impossible. She is not an adult in any way possible, so "consumating" with a 9 year old is pedophilia. These numbers are not arbitrary, they are chosen because they are thought to determine a certain level of physicial and mental maturity. And remembering prayers/hadiths does not mean one has a sharp mind - it only means they are good at remembering. Any 9 year old can do that.
Why is it that whenever there are facts that disprove your arguements, you guys consider them impossible. It is possible for people to evolve through monkeys but it is not possible for a 9 year old girl to be mature enough in every sense. You're logic only applies to things which benefit your arguements.Evolve through monkeys? It seems like you don't understand evolution in the first place. I suggest taking a Biology class. As for Aisha, 9 year old girls cannot be fully developed and comparable to 20 year old women. A 9 year old will look, and act like a child. Even if puberty started at a younger age for her (say 4), she will not look like a fully developed woman. It is scientifically impossible for a person to look like an adult at age 9.
"We" use arguments beneficial to us because it is supported by evidence. Your claim that a 9 year old girl can be as physically developed as a 20 year old woman is completely ludicrious and has no evidence supporting it.
[QUOTE="hagiiiiiiiiii"]
I apologize for the bad quoting.
For your questions. Why not find a way to integrate with society without excluding the rights of religious beliefs? Is the society your talking about really that ignorant about respecting peoples beliefs and understanding them? Really, you make it seem like it's impossible for a society to integrate when there are people from diffferent religions and cultures. The head scarf does come from Quran, there is no need to argue about facts.RationalAtheist
Its hard, as religious beliefs are irrational. If I believed that painting my ears red and carrying a big stick around was my religious right, should that be allowed outside my home and front garden? If religious demands require those of that faith to visibly identify themselves, I'd say it would erode the cohesion that bids society and places barriers to understanding and communication between people. Rather, for fear of alienating, offending, or demarking sections of society, we should cater to the lowest common denominator - that of making the legal position entirely neutral towards religious desires.
In a schoolroom full of French schoolchildren, would you like to be easily able to identify all the Muslims? Why?
Surely, if the headscarf comes from the Koran, you have the facts to back it up.... I challenge you!
Well give me a religion that proposes you to do that and i shall see, other then that stop crying over something that does not exist. Yes you can identify the muslim, if a good muslim, you will see that he/she is way more respectful to his/her teacher then other students. If lowest common denominator is needed then we should not have people of different races living together if you are worried about seperation that much. You have given a nonvalid point. Multicultural and religious beliefs do not seperate people, take Canada for example.[QUOTE="RationalAtheist"][QUOTE="rimnet00"][QUOTE="Gipsyeyes"]I've got a question for you. How can you justify your "prophet" Mohammad being a pedophile? Here's proof for people who don't know about Islam's so called prophet marrying a 9 year old girl called Aisha, and consummating the marriage at the age of 9. Check this out:Mohammad was a pedophile
rimnet00
It was the normal in those times to marry young, considering life expectancyin that time period.
With that said. The sources on Wikipedia that claim such a thing happened, is from unsound Hadith and Watt, who uses these Hadith as proof, and is also an Islamophobe. Hence, there is no proof of such a thing to begin with.
What is unsound about that hadith?
Why should the views of Watt be discarded simply because of their outcome? Why would these views make Watt and Islamaphobe? Surely, you could respond with some factual evidence to back up your assertion?
If you do a search on "Science of Hadith", you should be able to find some resources to better understand how the Hadith were compiled and how each entry was categorized. The Hadith which are used as sources to conclude that Aisha was 9 years old are not amongst the "sound/supported" Hadith, due to the nature by which they were obtained, and instead fall into the "weak" category.
The reason I disgard Watt's views is simply becaus he is an intermediate source, who does not provide anything new to the table. Instead he takes weak Hadith as truth, only to propagate his agenda.
The fact is, no one knows how old she is. In fact, anyone who cares to research this topic will know that the age of consumation is unknown, but is estimated to be anywhere between 9 and 16.
I know about that. I was wondering as many of these hadiths are used here by an Islamic site to describe her age accurately as marrying at the age of six and moving in with him at nine years old. Funny how this site came up in my search following your own recommendation.
What is Watts agenda?
[QUOTE="hagiiiiiiiiii"][QUOTE="The_Ish"][QUOTE="hagiiiiiiiiii"][QUOTE="Gipsyeyes"]First please go study what pedophile is. For your question i think you meant, How can you justify your "prophet" Mohammed NOTbeing a pedophile?I've got a question for you. How can you justify your "prophet" Mohammad being a pedophile? Here's proof for people who don't know about Islam's so called prophet marrying a 9 year old girl called Aisha, and consummating the marriage at the age of 9. Check this out:Mohammad was a pedophile
The_Ish
Aisha had completely gone through her menstrual cycle at the age of 9, ( let me refer to you that in England the average age is 18, in France it's 17, in holland it's 12) so these are just arbitrary numbers thrown around, so her body was not at the age of a 9 year old but rather around 20 year old girl who has fully developed her body. Not just physically but her sharpness at the age of 9 was crystal claer, she was profound of remembering many hadith's and teaching them to the general women in public.
First of all, that is impossible. She is not an adult in any way possible, so "consumating" with a 9 year old is pedophilia. These numbers are not arbitrary, they are chosen because they are thought to determine a certain level of physicial and mental maturity. And remembering prayers/hadiths does not mean one has a sharp mind - it only means they are good at remembering. Any 9 year old can do that.
Why is it that whenever there are facts that disprove your arguements, you guys consider them impossible. It is possible for people to evolve through monkeys but it is not possible for a 9 year old girl to be mature enough in every sense. You're logic only applies to things which benefit your arguements.Evolve through monkeys? It seems like you don't understand evolution in the first place. I suggest taking a Biology class. As for Aisha, 9 year old girls cannot be fully developed and comparable to 20 year old women. A 9 year old will look, and act like a child. Even if puberty started at a younger age for her (say 4), she will not look like a fully developed woman. It is scientifically impossible for a person to look like an adult at age 9.
"We" use arguments beneficial to us because it is supported by evidence. Your claim that a 9 year old girl can be as physically developed as a 20 year old woman is completely ludicrious and has no evidence supporting it.
Not necessarily, did you see the 7 year old Chinese kid who is taking university level math and claiming that he has studied it 2 years ago? In God's presence, miracles do happen. You can take many examples, in an earth quake where the whole city has been wiped out, a mosque was standing. Science and psyshics would say that it is impossible for it to be standing. I'll be back in 10 mins.
[QUOTE="RationalAtheist"][QUOTE="hagiiiiiiiiii"]
I apologize for the bad quoting.
For your questions. Why not find a way to integrate with society without excluding the rights of religious beliefs? Is the society your talking about really that ignorant about respecting peoples beliefs and understanding them? Really, you make it seem like it's impossible for a society to integrate when there are people from diffferent religions and cultures. The head scarf does come from Quran, there is no need to argue about facts.hagiiiiiiiiii
Its hard, as religious beliefs are irrational. If I believed that painting my ears red and carrying a big stick around was my religious right, should that be allowed outside my home and front garden? If religious demands require those of that faith to visibly identify themselves, I'd say it would erode the cohesion that bids society and places barriers to understanding and communication between people. Rather, for fear of alienating, offending, or demarking sections of society, we should cater to the lowest common denominator - that of making the legal position entirely neutral towards religious desires.
In a schoolroom full of French schoolchildren, would you like to be easily able to identify all the Muslims? Why?
Surely, if the headscarf comes from the Koran, you have the facts to back it up.... I challenge you!
Well give me a religion that proposes you to do that and i shall see, other then that stop crying over something that does not exist. Yes you can identify the muslim, if a good muslim, you will see that he/she is way more respectful to his/her teacher then other students. If lowest common denominator is needed then we should not have people of different races living together if you are worried about seperation that much. You have given a nonvalid point. Multicultural and religious beliefs do not seperate people, take Canada for example.African tribesemen follow these beliefs of painting their ears red and carrying spears. Who is crying now?
How outrageous your claim of Muslim students being more respectful to their teacher, (if they are good Muslims). Its certainly not true. I, as an ex-teacher, can attest to that. I have accounts of how rude Islamic students can be to female teachers especially.
I can't see how you can bring race into this. We are all in the human race. You must be deluded to think that religious beliefs do not seperate people - they have been the cause of war and devastation for millenia!
Not necessarily, did you see the 7 year old Chinese kid who is taking university level math and claiming that he has studied it 2 years ago? In God's presence, miracles do happen. You can take many examples, in an earth quake where the whole city has been wiped out, a mosque was standing. Science and psyshics would say that it is impossible for it to be standing. I'll be back in 10 mins.hagiiiiiiiiii
Knowing "hadiths" does not prove her intelligence/sharpness of mind, and thats what you are basing your argument on. As I said, remembering prayers/hadiths is something any 9 year old can do. And you havn't addressed how it might be in any way possible for a 9 year old to look like a 20 year old.
As for you're statement about the mosque, first, link. Second, science and physics would not say it's impossible (you are showing a lack of understanding of these principles and disciplines), only baffled scientists who don't know all the variables or agenda-driven politicians.
[QUOTE="rimnet00"][QUOTE="RationalAtheist"][QUOTE="rimnet00"][QUOTE="Gipsyeyes"]I've got a question for you. How can you justify your "prophet" Mohammad being a pedophile? Here's proof for people who don't know about Islam's so called prophet marrying a 9 year old girl called Aisha, and consummating the marriage at the age of 9. Check this out:Mohammad was a pedophile
RationalAtheist
It was the normal in those times to marry young, considering life expectancyin that time period.
With that said. The sources on Wikipedia that claim such a thing happened, is from unsound Hadith and Watt, who uses these Hadith as proof, and is also an Islamophobe. Hence, there is no proof of such a thing to begin with.
What is unsound about that hadith?
Why should the views of Watt be discarded simply because of their outcome? Why would these views make Watt and Islamaphobe? Surely, you could respond with some factual evidence to back up your assertion?
If you do a search on "Science of Hadith", you should be able to find some resources to better understand how the Hadith were compiled and how each entry was categorized. The Hadith which are used as sources to conclude that Aisha was 9 years old are not amongst the "sound/supported" Hadith, due to the nature by which they were obtained, and instead fall into the "weak" category.
The reason I disgard Watt's views is simply becaus he is an intermediate source, who does not provide anything new to the table. Instead he takes weak Hadith as truth, only to propagate his agenda.
The fact is, no one knows how old she is. In fact, anyone who cares to research this topic will know that the age of consumation is unknown, but is estimated to be anywhere between 9 and 16.
I know about that. I was wondering as these hadiths are used here by and Islamic site to describe her age accurately as marrying at the age of six and moving in with him at nine years old. Funny how this site came up in my search following your own recommendation.
What is Watts agenda?
You knew about the Science of Hadith, yet you asked "What is unsound about that Hadith?". Your question implies ignorance to the categorizations of Hadith.
I suggested you search for "Science of Hadith", yet you suggest that it somehow directed you to discussion about Aisha's age. When in fact, google does not even list that URL for at least the first five pages.
I suggest, you try once again.
What about the historical conquest of Islam? After Mohammad's death his successors just carried on with the conquest he started?
Its a fact that Islam was mainly spread by force, unlike Christianity which spread generally voluntarily. Now im not saying people were killed if they did not accept Islam, but they had less rights, and itwas inevitable if a country/kingdom fall to a different faith the populace will be converted.
Take for example the Crusades, im not saying they were right, but was it not a fair act of retaliation? Its long been considered that the Crusades were an event where "loads of evil westerners went to the middle east and started forcing Christianity on Muslims". But wasn't Jerusalem taken by force in 635(i think) in the first place from the Byzantine Empire? I mean most of the eastern world was Orthodox Christianity. But is it not true at exactly the same time you were conquering all over the world? Its a fact that the Pope did not call a Crusade because Jerusalem was partially import, but to draw in Islamic armies to take pressure off all of the other Christian kingdoms...
TakeSpain, what about the Islam conquest of Spain? Justification, for the conquest of all those Kingdoms? Even parts of southern France? It was said by Islamic conquerors at the time they wanted to sack Rome., tacking areas of southern France on the way. Egypt? Persia? India? Armenia (later genocide)? All of these places were taken by force And the Buddha's of east Asia?
Muslims make out that Christians are real b****** but what about these things, like Turkey would not exist without conquest.
Now im not saying that you were evil conquerors, but gaining an empire from Southern France to India does not come without war, and you can't say it was a big coincidence that you had a reason to attack everyone, and you were just defending yourselves or had justification for every conquest? Come on...
So do you admit Muslims were just ad bad? If not worst.
Darthric
yes Muslims were bad, But you guys still win the cake by a long shot. Christianization of europe was fairly blood,Crusades,New world,Slavery,Empiralism,World wars and everything in the cold war...we are actaully far behind.
Do Muslims have the innate ability to grow awesome beards, or is it some sort of technique? Being a non-Muslim, can I learn this technique? GettingTired
Infidels can have beards too.
Just wait (and don't shave at all).
You also have to be a pubsecent male.
[QUOTE="GettingTired"]Do Muslims have the innate ability to grow awesome beards, or is it some sort of technique? Being a non-Muslim, can I learn this technique? RationalAtheist
Infidels can have beards too.
Just wait (and don't shave at all).
You also have to be a pubsecent male.
That's true. Since I'm not Muslim, I've tried growing an Atheist beard. But being young, I'm not sure it's possible. All the great Atheists with beards that I have seen have grown them in old age. For instance, Charles Darwin and Karl Marx had awesome beards, but they were older.
[QUOTE="RationalAtheist"][QUOTE="rimnet00"][QUOTE="RationalAtheist"][QUOTE="rimnet00"][QUOTE="Gipsyeyes"]I've got a question for you. How can you justify your "prophet" Mohammad being a pedophile? Here's proof for people who don't know about Islam's so called prophet marrying a 9 year old girl called Aisha, and consummating the marriage at the age of 9. Check this out:Mohammad was a pedophile
rimnet00
It was the normal in those times to marry young, considering life expectancyin that time period.
With that said. The sources on Wikipedia that claim such a thing happened, is from unsound Hadith and Watt, who uses these Hadith as proof, and is also an Islamophobe. Hence, there is no proof of such a thing to begin with.
What is unsound about that hadith?
Why should the views of Watt be discarded simply because of their outcome? Why would these views make Watt and Islamaphobe? Surely, you could respond with some factual evidence to back up your assertion?
If you do a search on "Science of Hadith", you should be able to find some resources to better understand how the Hadith were compiled and how each entry was categorized. The Hadith which are used as sources to conclude that Aisha was 9 years old are not amongst the "sound/supported" Hadith, due to the nature by which they were obtained, and instead fall into the "weak" category.
The reason I disgard Watt's views is simply becaus he is an intermediate source, who does not provide anything new to the table. Instead he takes weak Hadith as truth, only to propagate his agenda.
The fact is, no one knows how old she is. In fact, anyone who cares to research this topic will know that the age of consumation is unknown, but is estimated to be anywhere between 9 and 16.
I know about that. I was wondering as these hadiths are used here by and Islamic site to describe her age accurately as marrying at the age of six and moving in with him at nine years old. Funny how this site came up in my search following your own recommendation.
What is Watts agenda?
You knew about the Science of Hadith, yet you asked "What is unsound about that Hadith?". Your question implies ignorance to the categorizations of Hadith.
I suggested you search for "Science of Hadith", yet you suggest that it somehow directed you to discussion about Aisha's age. When in fact, google does not even list that URL for at least the first five pages.
I suggest, you try once again.
No, I used the keywords "Hadith" and "Aisha" for my search, getting 181,000 results!
Your deflection does nothing to mitigate the many references in hadiths about the age of Aisha.
If you assume I am unwise in the teachings of the categorisations of the Hadith, why not enlighten me, with reference to Aisha?
No, I used the keywords "Hadith" and "Aisha" for my search, getting 181,000 results!
Your deflection does nothing to mitigate the many references in hadiths about the age of Aisha.
If you assume I am unwise in the teachings of the categorisations of the Hadith, why not enlighten me, with reference to Aisha?
RationalAtheist
Clearly, I did not ask you to google "Hadith Aisha". Considering this is the hottest Islam vs Others topic on the Internet, doing so would have been completely counter productive. Unless you have been living under a rock for the past 5 years, you know as well as I do.
I suggested instead that you google "Science of Hadith", so as to better understand why the sourced Hadith's are unsound. I gave you the benfit of the doubt. If you were truely interested in the subject, you would attempt to do a bit of research. Instead, you have displayed quite clearly to me, that you wish only to argue. Arguing by nature is not productive, and hense a waste of your time and mine.
You have your stance, and I have mine.
wasnt this supposed to be a friendly topic? cant we all just get along. Also dont mix culture with religion. every religion has people doing good and bad in its name. NOBODY IS PERFECT! WE ARE ALL HUMAN! so instead of arguing about whose religion or belief has worser people because for one thing its gonna go nowhere, and 2nd, its not gonna prove which religion is right. you have to look at the teachings themselves.
Okay so you've a Muslim trying to defend 50 year old Mohammad marrying a 9 year old. I've got another question. Why did your Mohammad destroy the Jewish tribe of Banu Quraiza? Eigtht hundred Jewish men were murdered under Mohammad's orders, their women taken as sex slaves, and their children as slaves too.
Actually, I have the answer: It was because they rfeused to convert to Islam!
Gipsyeyes
Get your facts straight, those are nothing but sincere made up lies. If the prophet ordered to kill 800 don't you think that it would havebeen rational to kill rest of the Jews? Honetly, you find few lies on the internet and because it benefits your arguement you call them facts and come up with questions in which you already made up the answer to.
[QUOTE="hagiiiiiiiiii"][QUOTE="RationalAtheist"][QUOTE="hagiiiiiiiiii"]
I apologize for the bad quoting.
For your questions. Why not find a way to integrate with society without excluding the rights of religious beliefs? Is the society your talking about really that ignorant about respecting peoples beliefs and understanding them? Really, you make it seem like it's impossible for a society to integrate when there are people from diffferent religions and cultures. The head scarf does come from Quran, there is no need to argue about facts.RationalAtheist
Its hard, as religious beliefs are irrational. If I believed that painting my ears red and carrying a big stick around was my religious right, should that be allowed outside my home and front garden? If religious demands require those of that faith to visibly identify themselves, I'd say it would erode the cohesion that bids society and places barriers to understanding and communication between people. Rather, for fear of alienating, offending, or demarking sections of society, we should cater to the lowest common denominator - that of making the legal position entirely neutral towards religious desires.
In a schoolroom full of French schoolchildren, would you like to be easily able to identify all the Muslims? Why?
Surely, if the headscarf comes from the Koran, you have the facts to back it up.... I challenge you!
Well give me a religion that proposes you to do that and i shall see, other then that stop crying over something that does not exist. Yes you can identify the muslim, if a good muslim, you will see that he/she is way more respectful to his/her teacher then other students. If lowest common denominator is needed then we should not have people of different races living together if you are worried about seperation that much. You have given a nonvalid point. Multicultural and religious beliefs do not seperate people, take Canada for example.African tribesemen follow these beliefs of painting their ears red and carrying spears. Who is crying now?
How outrageous your claim of Muslim students being more respectful to their teacher, (if they are good Muslims). Its certainly not true. I, as an ex-teacher, can attest to that. I have accounts of how rude Islamic students can be to female teachers especially.
I can't see how you can bring race into this. We are all in the human race. You must be deluded to think that religious beliefs do not seperate people - they have been the cause of war and devastation for millenia!
I have gotten into many discussions about this with my teachers. If you claim that wars have been brought up in the name of religionthen once again you are undermining the goodevents that happened in the name of religion.
It's not getting out of hand. I am actually loving this, I am 16 years old and i've got nothing to lose, I can learn and learn more. Thanks everyone for sharing the information, sorry if the topic is alittle heated up, but it is expected on such a controversial case.Wow this is getting out of control... i had a feeling it would turn this way... =P
NasRex
Do you think that the Qur'an promotes a tolerant viewpoint of people who follow non-Abrahamic religions (i.e. ones other than Islam, Judaism, and Christianity)?
I'm not asking if you think Muslims are, but rather if the Qur'an is.
Yes, it definetely does. Islam promotes tolerance to everyone other religion.Do you think that the Qur'an promotes a tolerant viewpoint of people who follow non-Abrahamic religions (i.e. ones other than Islam, Judaism, and Christianity)?
I'm not asking if you think Muslims are, but rather if the Qur'an is.
SpaceMoose
Are moderate muslims a reality? Is it true that the long term goal of islam is to have a muslim world? If so, by what means are you willing achieve this?buxboy
It's not a goal. It's a fact. Islam will take over, because people want justice. Sacrifices? Nothing beyond the borders of Islam.
Do you think that the Qur'an promotes a tolerant viewpoint of people who follow non-Abrahamic religions (i.e. ones other than Islam, Judaism, and Christianity)?
I'm not asking if you think Muslims are, but rather if the Qur'an is.
SpaceMoose
Jews and Christians are refered to as People of the Book, in the Qur'an. In other words, those who follow the message sent by God in the past. Tolerance, especially with the People of the Book is endorsed in the Qur'an. As you believe in the monothesistic God, as we do.
edit: link removed as it contains incorrect information.
Are moderate muslims a reality? Is it true that the long term goal of islam is to have a muslim world? If so, by what means are you willing achieve this?buxboy
Well, Islam won't be the world religion until after the Anti-Christ/Dajjal arrives, the second comming of Christ, and the arrival of The Mahdi.
[QUOTE="buxboy"]Are moderate muslims a reality? Is it true that the long term goal of islam is to have a muslim world? If so, by what means are you willing achieve this?hagiiiiiiiiii
It's not a goal. It's a fact. Islam will take over, because people want justice. Sacrifices? Nothing beyond the borders of Islam.As far as I am concerned. That will not happen.
Can you clarify that statement concerning, "the borders of islam?"
Jews and Christians are refered to as People of the Book, in the Qur'an. In other words, those who follow the message sent by God in the past. I'm not sure how much information on the wiki is accurate, but it should give you a starting point. However, tolerance, especially with the People of the Book is endorsed in the Qur'an. As you believe in the monothesistic God, as we do.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People_of_the_Book
rimnet00
I asked about the Qur'an's views on people who DON'T follow one of those three religions.
Well, Islam won't be the world religion until after the Anti-Christ/Dajjal arrives...
rimnet00
You rang? :P
I asked for people who DON'T follow one of those three religions.
SpaceMoose
Seems like I should head to bed, seems my reading comprehension just disappated ;) Sorry. Tolerance is perscribed for anyone, including athiests. In fact, the general concept of tolerance is, if two parties disagree in terms of religion, or thiesm/athiesm, to the point where the civil exchange of ideas cannot take place anymore, one should end by saying "I have my beliefs, and you have yours". This is the general rule of thumb when it comes to tolerance.
Specifically, this concept comes from the Chapter entitled, Al Khafiroon (The Disbelievers/Athiests/Unbelievers), which reads:
Say: "O ye that reject Faith!
I worship not that which ye worship,
Nor will ye worship that which I worship.
And I will not worship that which ye have been wont to worship,
Nor will ye worship that which I worship.
To you be your Way, and to me mine."
This is a very poetic Chapter, so the transliteration might take a little bit to understand. However, to put it into context, even Satan believes in God, so where does this leave Athiests? Not in good standing with God, surely. Even then, one must show tolerance to them.
[QUOTE="RationalAtheist"]No, I used the keywords "Hadith" and "Aisha" for my search, getting 181,000 results!
Your deflection does nothing to mitigate the many references in hadiths about the age of Aisha.
If you assume I am unwise in the teachings of the categorisations of the Hadith, why not enlighten me, with reference to Aisha?
rimnet00
Clearly, I did not ask you to google "Hadith Aisha". Considering this is the hottest Islam vs Others topic on the Internet, doing so would have been completely counter productive. Unless you have been living under a rock for the past 5 years, you know as well as I do.
I suggested instead that you google "Science of Hadith", so as to better understand why the sourced Hadith's are unsound. I gave you the benfit of the doubt. If you were truely interested in the subject, you would attempt to do a bit of research. Instead, you have displayed quite clearly to me, that you wish only to argue. Arguing by nature is not productive, and hense a waste of your time and mine.
You have your stance, and I have mine.
So you have no facts to back up your case. There is no "science" in the way I know in categorisation of the hadith. Categorisation occurs in random ways, initially by the religious heirarchy of the author. That sounds unscientific , as it gives greater benefit to people with vested interests.
Rather than give explicit links, you just suggest Googling for your site. This is not the hottest topic in "Islam vs. others category". Unless you have been living under a rock, you'll realise that Islamic terrorist extremism is the hottest topic in that category.
The hadiths listed the the Muslim web site link I gave are categorised variously. Well, after some research, the Sahih Al-Bukharihadith is said to be "the most prominent Sunni hadith"! This hadith gives Aisha'a age. So you are wrong about Aisha age - Mohammads 9 year old wife. (Married at the age of 6!)
I do wish to argue and debate, as it is the best way to resolve conflict. Arguments are senseless without supporting evidence. If you had some contrary evidence (as you say there is), you could prove me wrong.
[QUOTE="RationalAtheist"][QUOTE="hagiiiiiiiiii"][QUOTE="RationalAtheist"][QUOTE="hagiiiiiiiiii"]
I apologize for the bad quoting.
For your questions. Why not find a way to integrate with society without excluding the rights of religious beliefs? Is the society your talking about really that ignorant about respecting peoples beliefs and understanding them? Really, you make it seem like it's impossible for a society to integrate when there are people from diffferent religions and cultures. The head scarf does come from Quran, there is no need to argue about facts.hagiiiiiiiiii
Its hard, as religious beliefs are irrational. If I believed that painting my ears red and carrying a big stick around was my religious right, should that be allowed outside my home and front garden? If religious demands require those of that faith to visibly identify themselves, I'd say it would erode the cohesion that bids society and places barriers to understanding and communication between people. Rather, for fear of alienating, offending, or demarking sections of society, we should cater to the lowest common denominator - that of making the legal position entirely neutral towards religious desires.
In a schoolroom full of French schoolchildren, would you like to be easily able to identify all the Muslims? Why?
Surely, if the headscarf comes from the Koran, you have the facts to back it up.... I challenge you!
Well give me a religion that proposes you to do that and i shall see, other then that stop crying over something that does not exist. Yes you can identify the muslim, if a good muslim, you will see that he/she is way more respectful to his/her teacher then other students. If lowest common denominator is needed then we should not have people of different races living together if you are worried about seperation that much. You have given a nonvalid point. Multicultural and religious beliefs do not seperate people, take Canada for example.African tribesemen follow these beliefs of painting their ears red and carrying spears. Who is crying now?
How outrageous your claim of Muslim students being more respectful to their teacher, (if they are good Muslims). Its certainly not true. I, as an ex-teacher, can attest to that. I have accounts of how rude Islamic students can be to female teachers especially.
I can't see how you can bring race into this. We are all in the human race. You must be deluded to think that religious beliefs do not seperate people - they have been the cause of war and devastation for millenia!
I have gotten into many discussions about this with my teachers. If you claim that wars have been brought up in the name of religionthen once again you are undermining the goodevents that happened in the name of religion.
Like?..........
Morning...
Do you argue to prove yourself right or because you are interested to know?
Morning...
Do you argue to prove yourself right or because you are interested to know?
gamingqueen
Everyone likes to think they are correct, as I do.
I am interested in the truth of all religions.
I am particularly interested to know how people can evade giving answers, after they have offered to do so in a thread entitled "Any questions on Islam?".
Religions always tend to suppress discussion, whereas the scientific framework actively promotes it.
My questions are relevent and my assertions are all backed up by evidence.
[QUOTE="gamingqueen"]Morning...
Do you argue to prove yourself right or because you are interested to know?
RationalAtheist
Everyone like to think they are correct, as I do.
I am interested in the truth of all religions.
I am interested to know how people can evade giving answers, after they have offered to do so in a thread entitled "Any questions on Islam?"
My questions are relevent and my assertions are all backed up by evidence.
We simply disagree. I love to disagree with you and all I want is to disagree with you. Infact I could never agree with you... even if you say I love cake I'll say I hate cake just because I can! Does that remind you of someone here?
[QUOTE="RationalAtheist"][QUOTE="gamingqueen"]Morning...
Do you argue to prove yourself right or because you are interested to know?
gamingqueen
Everyone like to think they are correct, as I do.
I am interested in the truth of all religions.
I am interested to know how people can evade giving answers, after they have offered to do so in a thread entitled "Any questions on Islam?"
My questions are relevent and my assertions are all backed up by evidence.
We simply disagree. I love to disagree with you and all I want is to disagree with you. Infact I could never agree with you... even if you say I love cake I'll say I hate cake just because I can! Does that remind you of someone here?
We disagree about what? And why do we disagree? Does that not interest you?
Are you inferring that I don't really actually think the things I write about?
Would this personal attack better be sent to me as a PM, rather than taking this thread off-topic?
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment