ArtificialGlory
God-Emperor of Eternity
Originally posted by Darth Thor
You really haven't sufficiently addressed a single rebuttal of mine. And you have not evidenced a single thing. Again what's your source for when penetration took place?I already told you Islamic consummation does not necessitate penetration. You're just assuming that happened right away for reasons...
https://www.bing.com/search?q=Is+sex+required+for+Islamic+consummation&form=ANNTH1&refig=5f8c16280d564d09840c2b917268087c&pc=LCTS
"Intercourse is [b]not necessary
for consummation of marriage, from an Islamic point of view. This is the agreed position of the jamhur (majority jurists) including Hanafi, Maliki and Hanbal schools.""In Islam consummation of marriage occurs when the couple spend some time after the marriage in seclusion. Intercourse is not necessary for consummation of marriage. (See Fiqh al Ismaiy wa Adillathuh).."
Given he didn't bring her into his home for a few years shows he was not lusting or desperate for sexual relations with her, so the onus is on you to prove when penetration first took place.
Me being Muslim was to point out I know more than you on the Religion which is clear from this conversation.
It's also clear you're the one with a bias here, just making unsubstantiated claims without properly evidencing them like I am doing. I'm guessing this is your go to argument against Islam so you're not willing to budge an inch on your clearly unsubstantiated position.
Oh you don't know what a viable age of marriage is but it sure as shit isn't 9. How convenient. You want to base that on anything at all?
A more clear picture of what maturity for marriage is considered by the Quran and traditional Islamic scholars (because apparently the modern ones are all lying)..
Quran 4:6 from Surat An-Nisa' states that [i]"Orphans should be tested until they reach marriageable age. If they demonstrate sound judgment, their property should be released to them. However, it should not be consumed excessively or quickly. Witnesses should be present when handing over their properties."[i]
This not only makes it clear that there is a maturity level for marriage (i.e. not children), but scholars have determined from this that there's a clear mental faculty to that maturity as well.
Ibn Kathir's tafsir to this verse states maturity is at discharge (i.e. periods for a woman) between the ages of 9 to 15. Ergo a period before 9 would not count, not would a 16+ year old be required to keep waiting for her first period to be considered mature enough to consent. That's the physical requirement, but there's also a mental one as already stated.
^ Honestly this was a perfectly reasonable stance for the time period.
FYI Biologically a child is someone who hasn't began puberty.
Also FYI we're commanded not to harm each other (especially women and children) - refer to Muhammad's final sermon. We're even supposed to refer to medical doctors on what would be considered harm.
This is all part my knowledge on Islam and on the topic which is clearly above yours. And the reason why I don't just assume penetration definitely took place when she was 9. Nothing to do with bias, which is clearly what you are demonstrating. [/B]
Your desire to defend chomos is truly staggering. But if all it took to consummate a marriage is for the couple to merely spend some time alone, then why wait for those 3 years? The most likely explanation is that a 6 year-old was still too physically small for proper sexual intercourse to take place, hence the 3 year wait.
Just because my claims make you uncomfortable, does not make them unsubstantiated. And once again, you being a muslim is irrelevant to me. If anything, it makes you more likely to be biased.
"7th century historian Ibn Sa'd's biography holds her age at the time of marriage as between six and seven, and gives her age at consummation to be nine. However, Ibn Hisham's biography of Muhammad suggests she may have been ten years old at consummation."
"Beginning in the late nineteenth century, with the East and its alleged immoralities subject to increasing opprobrium,[43] the colonizing powers sought to regulate the age of consent. As such efforts ran into conflicts with local forms of Sharia, Aisha's age at marriage — and the involved Prophetic precedent — became the predominant explanation in explaining "the backwardness of Muslim societies and their reticence to reforms."[44] In response, some Muslims[c] re-evaluated her age, though conservatives rejected such readings since they conflicted with traditional ʻilm al-ḥadīth.[45]
Criticism of Aisha's age, which was standard for marriages in sixth-century Arabia,[46] has prompted many[d] modern Muslim scholars to contextualize the traditionally accepted age of Aisha with renewed vigor emphasizing cultural relativism, anachronism, the political dimensions of the marriage, Aisha's non-ordinary physique etc.[48][e][50]" Notice how absent the idea of non-sexual consummation is from all of this.
Yes, how dare I believe that screwing a 9 year-old is utterly deplorable? How about 16+ as a reasonable age, then? I think we can both agree on that.
I don’t get this stuff about demonstrating "sound judgment"? If a 7 year-old is deemed to have "sound judgment", does that make it OK to marry her off to a middle-aged man? Well, I think we sadly know the answer to that question.
So what if a girl has her first period at the age of 9 and she is deemed to have "sound judgment"? Does that make it OK to molest her?
As for Mohammed’s last sermon: he was simply being a hypocrite or was perhaps genuinely unaware of the harm he had caused. Still a chomo, a nonce, a pedophile.
If only you would use that knowledge to condemn Mohammed and his conduct instead of defending him. This is not a man worth emulating.