Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I would never follow a man who raped a nine year old child.
Oh, but you would. I find your moral absolutism weird considering other things we have discussed before.
Also you're using rape in a legal sense again? I don't know why you get your morality out of modern legislation when talking about a foreign man dead since long ago and who lived in a completely different society.
Originally posted by Bentley
Oh, but you would. I find your moral absolutism weird considering other things we have discussed before.
Originally posted by Bentley
Also you're using rape in a legal sense again?
Originally posted by Bentley
I don't know why you get your morality out of modern legislation when talking about a foreign man dead since long ago and who lived in a completely different society.
Originally posted by krisblaze
^From what age do you define pedophilia btw?
I don't know if I understand your question.
Having sex with a child (mentally or physically a child) is wrong. Pedophilia is the desire to have sex with a child.
As far as Muhammad is concerned, no Muslim has given me anything to indicate that Muhammad did not have sex with a 9 year old girl. All I get is insults. To me, that means that it's true. He did have sex with a 9 year old girl.
Do you think that having sex with a 9 year old girl make Muhammad a pedophilia?
The only answer I have ever gotten was, no, and because.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
NO! I would not! You are completely out of line! There is nothing that we have discussed that would lead you to such an erroneous conclusion!So, are you telling me that if child rape was not illegal that it’s okay?! Where are your morals?
What I'm telling you is that we invented children. Before we created that concept, you could find kids working before too. They'd expect you to give them a place in society and the prime situation for a woman back in the day was to be married.
So if the situation was between engaging a woman in sex (where you can technically be as gentle as you want) or having them being a pariah, even to this day, there is the concept of a lesser evil.
IF the lesser evil was to follow a pedophile, then you'd follow a pedophile. You might not want your choice, but you would still do it.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Pedophilia is wrong regardless. No one is going to go back in time and arrest Muhammad, but what he did back then is relevant today.
You are on the wrong side of this argument.
I don't go around assuming things are wrong by principle. They are relative to their concept and can go from pretty rough decisions because humanity has faced difficult situations before.
With this I'm not saying that influence and consent is not a problem with pedophilia, but it can also be the case with adults that are guilable and we don't look down to it nearly as much.
Originally posted by Bentley
What I'm telling you is that we invented children. Before we created that concept, you could find kids working before too. They'd expect you to give them a place in society and the prime situation for a woman back in the day was to be married.
Originally posted by Bentley
So if the situation was between engaging a woman in sex (where you can technically be as gentle as you want) or having them being a pariah, even to this day, there is the concept of a lesser evil.
Originally posted by Bentley
IF the lesser evil was to follow a pedophile, then you'd follow a pedophile. You might not want your choice, but you would still do it.
Originally posted by Bentley
I don't go around assuming things are wrong by principle. They are relative to their concept and can go from pretty rough decisions because humanity has faced difficult situations before.
Originally posted by Bentley
With this I'm not saying that influence and consent is not a problem with pedophilia, but it can also be the case with adults that are guilable and we don't look down to it nearly as much.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Are we talking about today, or in the past?Today, 18, unless the partner is within two years. I think that is how the law is today.
In the past, I would say puberty. 11 or 12? It depends on the girl.
18, that's what I thought.
That'd put around half of the world in the category of legalized pedophelia then.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
9 years old. She was married at 7. That is before puberty, and even in days you are talking about, before puberty was taboo.
Sure, it sounds pretty young. Even now I think girls can have kids at 9 at the youngest.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Are you saying that it’s good to have sex with a child? Better to have sex then be an outcast? That’s barbaric!
Is sex somehow bad to you? What's so impure about sex that makes you prefer to be an outcast for all your life? It puzzles me.
Sex is just a physical action, it can be traumatizing, yes, but I can think of countless things that are worse. In the context we are discussing, it doesn't even have to be brutal.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
No! I would kill him or die trying.
You're evil then. Or at least you have horrible prejudices.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
WE are talking about today.
Sure.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Rape is wrong. It doesn’t matter the age of the victim.
As I said, pedophilia poses consent issues.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Who's ignorance? We are not talking about a 17 year old girl. We are talking about a 9 year old girl.
Again, a girl that was married with an influential men for two years. For all we know she would consider herself dishonored if they didn't f_ck and would've killed herself at nine.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Who's ignorance? We are not talking about a 17 year old girl. We are talking about a 9 year old girl.
Wanting to bang young girls back then doesn't necessarily denote a mental disorder. Especially when you consider how much people have changed mentally in a couple of thousand of years.
I don't believe in Muahammad or that he was a "prophet", but I don't see why you would try to force modern a modern diagnosis on him. Especially not when you seem to have a loose enough grasp on that disorder.
And we don't know if he put one in her when she was yet a child.
Originally posted by Bentley
Sure, it sounds pretty young. Even now I think girls can have kids at 9 at the youngest.
Originally posted by Bentley
Is sex somehow bad to you? What's so impure about sex that makes you prefer to be an outcast for all your life? It puzzles me.
Originally posted by Bentley
Sex is just a physical action, it can be traumatizing, yes, but I can think of countless things that are worse. In the context we are discussing, it doesn't even have to be brutal.
Originally posted by Bentley
You're evil then. Or at least you have horrible prejudices.
Originally posted by krisblaze
I just wanted to use this occasion to point out the misuse of the world pedophilia, and highlight the relativity of these things.
Originally posted by krisblaze
Wanting to bang young girls back then doesn't necessarily denote a mental disorder. Especially when you consider how much people have changed mentally in a couple of thousand of years.
Originally posted by krisblaze
I don't believe in Muahammad or that he was a "prophet", but I don't see why you would try to force modern a modern diagnosis on him. Especially not when you seem to have a loose enough grasp on that disorder.
Originally posted by krisblaze
And we don't know if he put one in her when she was yet a child.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
That doesn’t make it right.
Oh, I don't think age makes things right.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Why would I be an outcast? You are making no sense.
The child would be an outcast.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
What do you think about pedophilia?
Personally I find it disgusting.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
That is not sex. That is rape. Do you not know the difference? Or do you mean to say coitus?
I meant to say coitus.
You're surely aware that a girl at that age would not feel coerced and she'd be pretty much convinced that she wants to have sex with the guy. While that's rape, the fact that the girl is formatted for that makes the formatting more violent in our eyes than the actual coitus from her perspective at least.
Originally posted by Shakyamunison
No. Killing a child rapist is a good thing.
Again, that girl who slept with a child once may have been the saviour of all your country, friends and family. She might've threated the child she raped with love and care, taking him out of the slums and giving him great education and a place in society. But you would kill her and be proud.
I don't personally think raping children deserves death, even if it's a horrible crime. So obviously I disagree with the statement.