"Everyone Draw Muhammad Day" causing waves.

Originally posted by Deadline

Your argument simply boils down to if people did something a long time ago and its common practice it makes it ok. Again I ask you.

I'd also question if marrying 6 year olds and then ****ing them when they were 9 was indeed a "common practice", or if he just used the "God told me to do it" angle and his clout of to pull it off. Considering the taking of a wife and then bearing children was important, doing it was a 9 year old seems anti-productive to the cause.

Anyone have any evidence that ****ing 9 nine olds was "common" circa 6th century? Just curious.

Originally posted by Deadline

Your argument simply boils down to if people did something a long time ago and its common practice it makes it ok. Again I ask you.

If the people didn´t know any better, is ignorance an excuse?

Of course its a disgusting thing, any normal person would think so. But were the people in them days "normal" compared to people of today?

And does "the majority rule" in a democratic sense apply here, ie if everyone is doing sick things does it make it righ? probably yes in the eyes of them people, but not in ours.

Originally posted by Bicnarok
If the people didn´t know any better, is ignorance an excuse?

Of course its a disgusting thing, any normal person would think so. But were the people in them days "normal" compared to people of today?

And does "the majority rule" in a democratic sense apply here, ie if everyone is doing sick things does it make it righ? probably yes in the eyes of them people, but not in ours.

But herein is where the problem lies. We're not talking about some random ignorant person - we're talking about a messenger of God who had a divine intelligence (as stated by himself and supposedly God).

He married Aicha not out of ignorance, but because God told him to marry her.
Any 54 year old man being aroused by a 9 year old is not right in the head, sorry, but no.

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
Any 54 year old man being aroused by a 9 year old is not right in the head, sorry, but no.

This is the angle I was coming from, as well. However, I'm far and away not qualified to make that statement...😘

Which was my point on him being a pedophile, as I can't see a non-pedophile being turned on by young child; I don't think the era would change this.

Originally posted by Rogue Jedi
Not if he used magical spells.

Muhammad casts protection from law!

On a more serious note where is it stated that he was aroused by her or has sex with her?

Originally posted by lil bitchiness
But herein is where the problem lies. We're not talking about some random ignorant person - we're talking about a messenger of God who had a divine intelligence (as stated by himself and supposedly God).

If he thinks he is the messenger of God then that has got to be proof of his ingnorance, insanity or oversuse of some LCD type plants.

I think the human race is now starting to wake up from these fairy strories from magic books, but in them days superstition was probably the norm.

Originally posted by Bicnarok
If he thinks he is the messenger of God then that has got to be proof of his ingnorance, insanity or oversuse of some LCD type plants.

Originally posted by Bicnarok
I think the human race is now starting to wake up from these fairy strories from magic books, but in them days superstition was probably the norm.

Basically you're bending over backwards trying to invent excuses for this guy. As somebody mentioned what proof is there it was common practice? I've studied Islam and I don't know anybody else who did it.

Originally posted by Bicnarok
If he thinks he is the messenger of God then that has got to be proof of his ingnorance, insanity or oversuse of some LCD type plants.

Im sorry but you're really trying to stretch this. I think you've created a series of excuses were if one fails something else will work.

Eventhough we can't be entirely sure he most likely wasn't insane or taking any plants. If you think he was taking plants please point us to the relevant hadiths.

He probably wasn't insane because I suspect he practiced meditation in order to gain his revelation. People in the ancient world and today can get visions from practicing meditation. Before Mohammed got his visions he used to spend time in the mountains, he was probably meditating. This is consistent with other religous and heroic figures in history such as Da Moa who spent 9 years in meditation. There is a legend of milerapa who spent his time in caves in order to seek enlightenment. Eventhough its a story it has basis in fact in that people would cut them self off from society and meditate.

Since hes responsible for his visions he has to take some responsibility. You have passages in the Koran that talk about charity and not killing babies if hes smart enough to figure out that burying babies alive is wrong he can damn well figure out marrying a nine year old is wrong.

Originally posted by Bicnarok

I think the human race is now starting to wake up from these fairy strories from magic books, but in them days superstition was probably the norm.

No we are not Carl Jung spent his life and studying stuff like that and he has a strong influence on modern psychology.

Im sorry just because you're superstitous doesn't make you exempt from responsibility. The concept of demons existed ie demons tell you to do evil shit. Not everybody was superstitous and not everybody took it literially considering the Koran is constantly telling you to use your head and analyse it could damn well be argued he should take some responsibility.

Originally posted by Deadline
Basically you're bending over backwards trying to invent excuses for this guy.

woo on boy, WTF are you on about. I´m not trying to make excuses for him or any other medievil person who may have perpertrated atrosities,

I´m just posing a few questions "food for thought" you might say.

Fact is these are different times than then, barbaric times.

Originally posted by Parmaniac
👆

Hopefully but the spreading of the islam in the last years (at least here in germany) contradicts with it. For some reason I have a bad feeling that this gonna end really bad.

Yep the way its growing it will be the dominant religion in Europe in 20 odd years, at least in Germany the Muslims are mostly Turkish muslims who are very moderate, unlike some of the lunatic´s in the UK or France. (I´m also in Germany bye the way)🙂

Originally posted by Bicnarok
woo on boy, WTF are you on about. I´m not trying to make excuses for him or any other medievil person who may have perpertrated atrosities,

I´m just posing a few questions "food for thought" you might say.

Fact is these are different times than then, barbaric times.

He's confused. I'm not sure why, but he mistook your post for justifying his (Muhammad) actions instead of your jesting about him (Muhammad) being on drugs. 😎

Originally posted by Bicnarok
Fact is these are different times than then, barbaric times.

I'd question that too, as I doubt every civilization in the 6th century was ****ing 9 year olds as the norm, slaughtering people or anything else we'd label "barbaric" today.

Then there's also the fact that we've probably not come as much as we'd like to think we had. Look at the wars today, look what's happening/happened in parts of Africa, SE Asia, the Balkans etc.

Anyhow, I strayed from my point, which I guess is, we can judge the act of ****ing little children who don't have a say in the matter to be deplorable, because it simply is. Then and now, imo.

just as a point of fact, I don't want to get back into this too much, but child brides were common in the communities Mohammed was a part of, and this, while not practiced by every individual, would not have been deviant for the time.

I looked it up on Wikipedia, so /fact

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aisha#Age_at_marriage

Child marriages such as this were relatively common in Bedouin societies at the time, and remain common in some modern societies worldwide. American scholar Colin Turner suggests that such marriages were not seen as improper in historical context, and that individuals in such societies matured at an earlier age than in the modern times. In modern times, however, the issue of Muhammad marrying and having sexual relations with a child so young has been used to criticize him, particularly in the West, where there is heightened and justifiable concern about child sexual abuse and related issues.

Originally posted by inimalist
just as a point of fact, I don't want to get back into this too much, but child brides were common in the communities Mohammed was a part of, and this, while not practiced by every individual, would not have been deviant for the time.

I looked it up on Wikipedia, so /fact

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aisha#Age_at_marriage

I found the paragraph above that one to be funny:

"References to Aisha's age by early historians are frequent.[3] According to Spellberg, historians who supported the Abbasid Caliphate against Shi'a claims considered Aisha's youth, and therefore her purity, to be of paramount importance. They thus specifically emphasized it, implying that as Muhammad's only virgin wife, Aisha was divinely intended for him, and therefore the most credible regarding the debate over the succession to Muhammad.[3]"

Dude couldn't find one girl of say 16-17 (still young and nubile) that was a virgin, not one girl in his lands that wasn't a little kid to fit the ****ing bill? Really?

but thats not the argument that anyone is having

sure, there could have been other ones, but that distinction would have been pointless in their cultural context

Just all odd, guy has a bunch of wives, yet is forced to marry a 6 year old in order to get himself a virgin? Seems like it's just a bunch of excusing being made after the fact, since it's Muhammad, imo.

excusing what though? nobody has said this was good or right

as I said before, that argument is essentially the same as calling people who question whether Isreal's Gaza policy makes their citizens safer terrorist sympathizers.

The point is that his culture would not have differentiated between a 6 year old and a 16 year old, other than the likelihood that the 16 year old would be seen as a less valuable gift.

Originally posted by Bicnarok
Yep the way its growing it will be the dominant religion in Europe in 20 odd years, at least in Germany the Muslims are mostly Turkish muslims who are very moderate, unlike some of the lunatic´s in the UK or France. (I´m also in Germany bye the way)🙂

Originally posted by inimalist
just as a point of fact, I don't want to get back into this too much, but child brides were common in the communities Mohammed was a part of, and this, while not practiced by every individual, would not have been deviant for the time.

I looked it up on Wikipedia, so /fact

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aisha#Age_at_marriage

However, it is NOT just people from the West, but people from the East who are criticizing this type of behaviour.

One thing that annoys the hell out of me is this notion that Arabs were these savages, who knew no law, they were child eaters, idol worshippers who just killed and destroyed everything before Muhammad showed up and showed them all the way to light.
That is the notion being put forward by the Muslims and Muslim apologetics all the time.

I mean, come on, that's just degrading to the Arab populations, Jew, Christian, Pagan and Muslim alike.

Originally posted by inimalist
explaining the cultural context and relevance of behaviour to understand why people behave in the way they do is not the same as excusing the moral ramifications of the behaviour.

I agree entirely. I was under the mistaken impression that the topic at hand was "was it moral" rather than "was it pedophilia."

QM, having taken the position that it was not pedophilia defaulted into the camp that it was moral, based on my mistaken reading of the situation. I don't know if I can explain any better just how clueless I really was?