Faith Freedom International :: View topic - How will the internet affect Islam?

Faith Freedom International

FAQ

Memberlist

Usergroups

Profile

How will the internet affect Islam?
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 Next

This forum is locked: you cannot post, reply to, or edit topics.

This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies.

Faith Freedom International Forum Index -> Reader's Comments On This Forum

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

bread
Guest

Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2003 1:32 pm Post subject:

Stopnot, the little American kid who read about Islam in a story book thinks he knows Islam. He thinks Isalm means peace. He starts his meesaages with peace greetings, and ends with threats and ad hominems. Yop, a true Islamic scholar alright. He shows promise. Maybe someone else from the Muslim side would like to discuss, because Stopnot has problems articulating what he thinks. I mean beyond a few ``scholarly`` personal attacks. Is there any Muslim here more able to speak for Islam tahn Stopnot? Also more polite. If there is, we`d like to discuss with you. Stopnot is beyond reach.

rand

Joined: 28 Jul 2002
Posts: 1752

Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2003 2:14 pm Post subject:

I wrote:

Quote:

But if someone claims to be an authority, how can you know that that person is in fact an authority?

Stopnot responded:

Quote:

Assalamu Alaikum rand,

There are certain conventions, like when the Prime minister/President/Royalty in your own country tells you that they are the ultimate authority you generally, begrudgingly or otherwise, do agree that they are the authority. You could hear it, see it or read about such proclamations. Such documents dealing with ultimate power distributions generally do have constitutional stature. Likewise, the Quran has a constitutional-like stature for Muslims.

Dear Stopnot,

Below are definitions of statutory rape and pedophilia based on authorities. The hadith which are considered an authoritative source for Islam indicate that Muhammad married a six-year-old and had sex with her when she was 9. . On the basis of authorities, it is clear that Muhammad was a statutory rapist and a pedophile. These are hardly the credentials for a prophet of a true just and merciful God.

Best wishes,
Rand

http://www.mafamily.org/Statutory%20Rape%20Report.pdf
writes:

Quote:

Legal Definition of Statutory Rape

Statutory rape laws are based on the premise that until a person reaches the age of majority, that person is legally incapable of consenting to sexual intercourse. Statutory rape was codified into English law more than 700 years ago when it became illegal “to ravish,” with or without her consent, a “maiden” under the age of 12. During the 19th century, states in this country gradually raised the age of consent, in some cases to 21. Today, the age of consent ranges from 14 to 18 years of age, although in more than half of the states the age of consent is 16.
The primary intention of statutory rape laws is to protect teenage girls and, recently, boys as well, from being sexually preyed upon by adults. By design, the laws are meant to deter and punish adults who have sex with minors. By definition, these laws are targeting non-forcible sexual activity. The age of consent in Massachusetts is 16 years old. States and counties are generally not pursuing teenage “lovers” who are close in age. Instead, law enforcement agencies typically prosecute statutory rape cases only when there is an age gap of 5 or more years between the minor and their partner.

http://www.ageofconsent.com/comments/pedophile.htm

Quote:

What is a Pedophile?

The American Psychiatric Association defines Pedophilia:

A pedophile is a person who over at least a 6 month period has recurrent, intense sexually arousing fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors involving sexual activity with a prepubescent child or children (age 13 years or younger). The fantasies, sexual urges, or behaviors cause clinically significant distress or impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning. The person is at least age 16 years and at least 5 years older than the child or children. Not to include an individual in late adolescence involved in an ongoing sexual relationship with a 12 or 13 year old (straight or gay). Individuals with pedophilia generally report an attraction to children of a particular age range. Some individuals prefer males, others prefer females, and some are aroused by both males and females. Pedophilia involving female victims is reported more than pedophilia involving male victims.

Reference; Diagnostic And Statistical Manual Of Mental Disorders, 4th Edition, American Psychiatric Association, 1994.

stopnot

Joined: 15 Apr 2003
Posts: 252
Location: inside your screen

Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2003 2:51 am Post subject:

Rand wrote:

Quote:

Below are definitions of statutory rape and pedophilia based on authorities.

Why don’t you mention that these are American and English definitions of late 20th century used for cases in America and/or England of late 20th century and cannot be used for case in tribal Arabia in the 7th century?

Rape was not reported by Aisha, the said wife of the prophet, nor by her parents, or by the community! On the contrary, her father insisted that she married the prophet. Where do you see the problems rape and paedophilia in the whole affair?

Further more, why don’t you read a bit closer your own material and think a bit harder where you are coming from because it does not add up with me:

Quote:

Statutory rape laws are based on the premise that until a person reaches the age of majority, that person is legally incapable of consenting to sexual intercourse. Statutory rape was codified into English law more than 700 years ago when it became illegal “to ravish,” with or without her consent, a “maiden” under the age of 12. During the 19th century, states in this country gradually raised the age of consent, in some cases to 21. Today, the age of consent ranges from 14 to 18 years of age, although in more than half of the states the age of consent is 16.

Rand, can you see from your own references that even in England it was LEGAL more that 700 years ago to do some things which later on became illegal?

Wassalam

Last edited by stopnot on Mon Oct 13, 2003 2:55 am; edited 1 time in total

stopnot

Joined: 15 Apr 2003
Posts: 252
Location: inside your screen

Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2003 2:52 am Post subject:

Piggy

Joined: 31 Dec 1969
Posts: 835

Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2003 3:10 am Post subject:

Stopnot, Do you think Mohammed is the best example to follow?

rand

Joined: 28 Jul 2002
Posts: 1752

Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2003 3:21 am Post subject:

Quote:

Rand wrote:

Quote:

Below are definitions of statutory rape and pedophilia based on authorities.

Quote:

Rand, can you see from your own references that even in England it was LEGAL more that 700 years ago to do some things which later on became illegal?

Wassalam

Dear Stopnot,

You explained the importance of following authorities, that is what the authorities are saying. Muhammad committed statutory rape and was a pedophile. I don't know what the law was in 7th century Arabia, but presumably, the authorities then were not as advanced as the authorities today.
Further, according to tradition, Muhammad was sent by Allah to be a messenger for all times and all places. Now, you are telling me that he was a messenger for 7th century arabia.
4.34 discusses wife-beating, presumably, that was popular in the 7th century, today authorities onsider it spousal-abuse.
I might add, that it discusses the child being less than 16 (how about 6) and the adult being at least 5 years older (how about over 40 years older).
If a person is a public figure, such as a prophet, they have an ethical responsibility to set a good example. He failed miserably. When I read about how in heaven one gets 70 or 72 virgins, it makes me wonder whether that was because this person was sex-obsessed that he had such fantasies.

Best regards,
Rand

stopnot

Joined: 15 Apr 2003
Posts: 252
Location: inside your screen

Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2003 6:09 am Post subject:

Rand wrote:

Quote:

I don't know what the law was in 7th century Arabia, but presumably, the authorities then were not as advanced as the authorities today.

Assalamu Alaikum rand,

Why then do you compare one form things/societies/authorities/bananas/apples to some other form of vastly different ones. There is not a word mentioned by you accounting for any historical/cultural/societal relativity. You just blast away and hope it works. Well, it does not for you this time, but keep on trying.

Quote:

If a person is a public figure, such as a prophet, they have an ethical responsibility to set a good example. He failed miserably. When I read about how in heaven one gets 70 or 72 virgins, it makes me wonder whether that was because this person was sex-obsessed that he had such fantasies.

Why don’t you stop looking into Islamic past and look around in the current world of public figures today in the west and see whether there is this utopian decorum you expect from such persons.

Case 1: Bill Clinton was offering cigars left, right and below the centre in his office and in the capacity of the President of USA and yet could not be impeached even after admitting to doing it and lying initially about it.

Case 1: Arnold Schwarzenegger was also famous for pumping not only iron but far more pleasant items he found in gyms around the world. His political views on Hitler have not changed that much over the years, and, as a true Austrian, you never know what kind of emotions he can start arising very soon from certain crowds, right on your channel. Yet he is the incumbent California governor.

Rand, do you think these two political actors have also failed or your cultural blindness is prevention you from seeing more than Death to Islam slogans all the way.

Wassalam

stopnot

Joined: 15 Apr 2003
Posts: 252
Location: inside your screen

Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2003 6:27 am Post subject:

bread wrote:

Quote:

He starts his meesaages with peace greetings, and ends with threats and ad hominems.

Assalamu Alaikum bread,

You have the temerity to speak of ad hominem? Surely not!

A person like you who has a signature which reads as ad hominem par excellence in denigrating Islam and the prophet Muhammad cannot have any ground to expect any different in return. This is because even if you do not write anything at all and just post a black your signature tells what you are all about.

Quote:

Stopnot, the little American kid …

Bread, I am so happy to see that you have finally found the right picture from your family album and are trying to impress us all at FFI with it.

I see on it that you are holding the two latest editions to the bread family.
These three bundles look like triplets to me.
Are they boys or girls of what?
Do tell us the good news, please.
It’s such a trill for me, honestly!

Wassalam

Spinoza

Joined: 31 Dec 1969
Posts: 1214

Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2003 6:34 am Post subject:

Quote:

Why then do you compare one form things/societies/authorities/bananas/apples to some other form of vastly different ones.

No, he quoted some of the most applicable authorities possible. Who else would you quote in case of child rape?

Quote:

There is not a word mentioned by you accounting for any historical/cultural/societal relativity. You just blast away and hope it works. Well, it does not for you this time, but keep on trying.

You see, Mohammed is an 'example' for all times and all places and all humans. There is no 'relativity' here. Mo set the standard for 21th century malay, pakistani and ugandese muslims alike.

Quote:

Why don’t you stop looking into Islamic past and look around in the current world of public figures today in the west and see whether there is this utopian decorum you expect from such persons.

Well, in the 'west' you get prosecuted and put to jail for raping a 6 year old and in the 'west' we don't usually hold child rapists as the perfect example to follow and don't take their every word as divine inspirations.

Quote:

Case 1: Bill Clinton was offering cigars left, right and below the centre in his office and in the capacity of the President of USA and yet could not be impeached even after admitting to doing it and lying initially about it.

He didn't rape a child, he didn't claim to be God's messenger and if he did people would surely point at his rather 'human' behaviour to debunk his claim.

Quote:

Case 1: Arnold Schwarzenegger was also famous for pumping not only iron but far more pleasant items he found in gyms around the world.

So, Arnold didn't rape a child and he didn't claim to be God messenger either. Bad example.

Quote:

His political views on Hitler have not changed that much over the years, and, as a true Austrian, you never know what kind of emotions he can start arising very soon from certain crowds, right on your channel. Yet he is the incumbent California governor.

I find that to be a *very* racist argument. I know many fine Austrians and they are amongst the most cultured and polite peoples of the world.

Quote:

Rand, do you think these two political actors have also failed or your cultural blindness is prevention you from seeing more than Death to Islam slogans all the way.

Yes, these people are both *far* from perfect. So, nobody in the west is following them claiming they are the perfect examples for all humanity to follow, the messengers of God even. Because of Mahomet's example old men in the Ummah are marrying extremely young girls, raping them AND getting away with it.

In the West such behaviour is not tollerated even if it may happen or may have happened in the past: having sex with young children is immoral and extremely damaging and not the kinf of behaviour one would expect from the messenger of God and his companions.

Would you have a 50 year old bearded sweaty old man marry your 6 year old daughter/cousin/sister?

Which of these young girls do YOU think would make a suitable bride for this man?

Hey you know what? He could marry all 4 if he wanted!

Unknown 288

Joined: 31 Dec 1969
Posts: 69

Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2003 7:06 am Post subject:

To stopnot I cannot imagine that such a belief which spreads through terror and bloodshed for centuries could just turn out all goody-goody so suddenly in modern times. We all know that history is bound to repeat itself. Have not the recent streak of terrorism serve us as a wake-up call? From history we know that civilizations that spread through violence always crumble in the end. I doubt that Islam will not suffer the same fate.

bread
Guest

Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2003 7:10 am Post subject:

Quote:

Interesting, Stopnot, you begin your message with a greeting then you always end with an insult. Is that Islamic double mind or split personality?

And yes, I stand by my signature. Tell you what Stopnot, if you will engage into a reasoned, poilite and respectful discussion of the issues I raised in my signature about MuhamMAD, and you proove I am mistaken about them, I will replace it with a signature praising MuhamMAD. Deal?

It is so far the contention of most non-Muslims and ex-Muslims that MuhamMAD, according to Islamic scholarship did have sex with a 9 year old Ayesha (many Hadithes testify to this), as well as that MuhamMAD did massacre thousands of war prisonners Arabs, Jews, Christians, Syrians, Yemeni etc, that his trrops raped their women and children and sold them into slavery, that he execute war prisoners by the thousands, that MuhamMAD launched conquest campaigns inside and outside Arabia and that MuhamMAD ethcnically cleansed Arabia of Jews and Christians as well as compelled at sword point all remaining pagan tribes of Arabia to accept Islam.

Thus Stopnot, it is not I, but Islamic sources accepted by all Sunnis, most Shias and most Muslim sects as valid, that condemn MuhamMAD guilty as charged. Therefore it is NOT an ad hominem to call MuhamMAD by the charges he is guilty of according to Orthodox Islam itself.

It is however an ad hominem for you to launch endless and un-warranted and un-scholarly attacks against other members of this site. It would also be ad hominem if some other members would reciprocate and personally attack you and accuse you of things there is no proof that you are guilty of.

Keep it clean and reasoned. It is how everybody else but you behaves here. You are breaking the rules on the front page. It says personal attacks are not allowed. Yet you break that rule continuosly.

This is not a place for you to display Muslim intolerance. You are showing Islam in a bad light if all you can bring at the table is name calling. Othe Muslims here have discussed charges against Islam, MuhamMAD and Islamic practices. The better of them did not find it necessary to engage in ad hominums, because they had more valid arguments than that.
Can you join them, or are you going to remain the same angry, name calling person.

Peace

M

Joined: 16 Mar 2003
Posts: 133

Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2003 8:11 am Post subject:

Quote:

KEEP ON DREAMING, UTTER LOSER!

Stopnot, we have had several complaints about your abuse and name-calling toward your opponents.

Please cease.

Thank you for your cooperation,

Sincerely,

The Moderators' Team

l l

Joined: 15 Aug 2002
Posts: 1625

Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2003 9:34 am Post subject:

Quote:

[quote="bread"]
Interesting, Stopnot, you begin your message with a greeting then you always end with an insult. Is that Islamic double mind or split personality?

Quote:

It is so far the contention of most non-Muslims and ex-Muslims that MuhamMAD, according to Islamic scholarship did have sex with a 9 year old Ayesha (many Hadithes testify to this), as well as that MuhamMAD did massacre thousands of war prisonners Arabs, Jews, Christians, Syrians, Yemeni etc, that his trrops raped their women and children and sold them into slavery, that he execute war prisoners by the thousands, that MuhamMAD launched conquest campaigns inside and outside Arabia and that MuhamMAD ethcnically cleansed Arabia of Jews and Christians as well as compelled at sword point all remaining pagan tribes of Arabia to accept Islam.

Muhammad found it necessary to compromise his religion and incorporate in Quran the prevailing customs, traditions and practices of his people. Thus he fossilized Muslims in a 7th century mind set.

Initially the message of Muhammad might have been strictly moral and ethical. That did not attract followers because there were other systems of belief that were just as ethical and moral or even more so with a claim to be divinely inspired. In addition the paganism of the Arabs had some humanizing factors. They saw no reason to switch to the ideology preached by Muhammad. There were Arab tribes who were Jews, Christians and Pagans already living side by side and fighting when they had to fight for economic reasons and not for religious supremacy. Muhammad could not attract more than a handful of followers on the basis of moral and ethics. They already had such princples in their Judaism, Christianity and Paganism.

It is when Muhammad started to compromise his religion by adding to it cetain aspects of the traditions of the nomadic Arabs that he started to get more followers. It is important here to keep in mind that The Arabs of Arabia were tribal, lived in harsh barren desert with meager resources. They engaged in frequent deadly fights over meager water and grazing resources. They engaged in marauding campaigns against villages and towns of neighboring countries whenever they had opportunity. Following are several examples of traditions of Arabs that Muhammad incorporated in his message and Quran to attract certain type of followers that were critical to his success.

1- Divine legitimization of polygymy
2- Divine legitimization of marriage to minors
3- Divine legitimization of slavery
4- Divine legitimization of sex/rape of captive
5- Divine legitimization of sale of prisoners of war
6- Divine legitimization of maruding and warfare for the sake of plunder
7- Divine legitimization of distribution of booty- 2/5 for the leader (Muhammad and his successors) with lessor portions down in line.

All above in original form or modified forms are still practiced in Islamic countries. Oil wealth in Islaic countries is either owned outright by the ruling clans or is at the disposal of the dictators to be used to reward friends and punish enemies.

The incorporation of 7th century Arab practices and prevailing customs into Quran have fossilized Muslims in a 7th century mind set. They are not able to break from it for a variety of reasons including harsh punishment up to death by those who self appoint themselves as protectors of literal interpretation of Quran and Islamic orthodoxy according to hadith. If we go through Quran we find that in addition to aforementioned cultural customs of Arabs, it (Quran) is filled with 7th century customs and practices that Muhammad incorporated as Allah mandated/sanctioned/prohibited injuctions that cover all aspects of the Muslim life functions and activities from birth to death. Things would not be bad if Muslims were not forced into a literal interpretation of Quran based on 7th century customs and practices.

best regards

stopnot

Joined: 15 Apr 2003
Posts: 252
Location: inside your screen

Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2003 1:07 pm Post subject:

The Moderators' Team wrote:

Quote:

Stopnot, we have had several complaints about your abuse and name-calling toward your opponents.

Please cease.

Thank you for your cooperation,

Sincerely,

The Moderators' Team

Assalamu Alaikum Moderators' Team,

O.K.

Wassalam

stopnot

Joined: 15 Apr 2003
Posts: 252
Location: inside your screen

Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2003 1:53 pm Post subject:

Spinoza wrote:

Quote:

No, he quoted some of the most applicable authorities possible. Who else would you quote in case of child rape?

Assalamu Alaikum Spinoza,

OK, but where is the word ‘rape’ in these authoritative documents linked to the marital status of prophet Muhammad. The fact is that it is not found there but in the minds of some men like yourself.

Quote:

Who else would you quote in case of child rape?

The documentary evidence which reports child rape!

Quote:

You see, Mohammed is an 'example' for all times and all places and all humans. There is no 'relativity' here. Mo set the standard for 21th century malay, pakistani and ugandese muslims alike. … Well, in the 'west' you get prosecuted and put to jail for raping a 6 year old and in the 'west' we don't usually hold child rapists as the perfect example to follow and don't take their every word as divine inspirations.

Offcourse there is relativity issue here but you intentionally avoid it and that is why you are using the yard stick of today in the west to measure an event which took place in 7th century Arabia. If you were to be truthfull you could point to the facts as alluded by the material posted by rand on Mon Oct 13, 2003 7:21 am which I have commented above:

Quote:

Statutory rape was codified into English law more than 700 years ago when it became illegal …

So, why don’t you use a pre-13th century English law as a yard stick to measure the alleged rape? The answer is: because you know it would be found that these were the socio-cultural norms of the times.

He didn't rape a child, and if he did people would surely point at his rather 'human' behaviour to debunk his claim according to your theory.

You sound a bit confused a bit here: are you saying that Muhammad was not human? Islamic primary sources are replete with refutation of the issue.

Quote:

I find that to be a *very* racist argument. I know many fine Austrians and they are amongst the most cultured and polite peoples of the world.

Do you know? I happen to have lived in Austria for nearly a year in the early 80’s and have keen interest in its affairs.

Indeed, the majority of Austrians are very fine and all that but there are regions where the general sentiment has not changed since around 1930’s.

Don’t you know who Jorg Hider is and that he was the leader of the Freedom party (FPO) in Austria for many years and only has stepped from being a leader, but is still behind the front line of politics?

Wassalam

stopnot

Joined: 15 Apr 2003
Posts: 252
Location: inside your screen

Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2003 4:21 pm Post subject:

Bread wrote:

Quote:

Thus Stopnot, it is not I, but Islamic sources accepted by all Sunnis, most Shias and most Muslim sects as valid, that condemn MuhamMAD guilty as charged.

Bread, you should know better than that! None of the Islamic primary source you are referring to condemns Muhammad as being charged with anything. Therefore IT IS an ad hominem to refer of Muhammad being charged according to Orthodox Islam itself.

Quote:

It would also be ad hominem if some other members would reciprocate and personally attack you and accuse you of things there is no proof that you are guilty of. … Can you join them, or are you going to remain the same angry, name calling person.

Before I answer your critical question let me see the evidence of what I have been called so far so far highlight in bold:

Written by spinoza:

1. Posted: Mon Sep 29, 2003 8:04 am
They only muslims that remain are either incredibly stupid

2. Posted: Mon Sep 29, 2003 11:08 am
Yes you got it wrong, they are either very stupid and dishonest

These people are either ignorant or choose to remain ignorant: they are 'stupid' by any standard.

3. Posted: Mon Sep 29, 2003 12:28 pm
I said the vast majority of Muslims is ignorant and some are just plain evil. The good ones are somewhat delusional.

4. Posted: Thu Oct 02, 2003 9:43 am
Like I said, the vast majority of Muslims is ignorant (and that’s rather stupid)

5. Posted: Sat Oct 04, 2003 10:13 am
Cut the crap and answer the man. … What a load of crap. … You're nothing but a bag of hot air unless you deliver us the goods.

6. Posted: Tue Oct 07, 2003 11:13 am
You’re, what is called in scholarly terms a ‘Follis Aurae’ a ‘Folliculus Aurae’ even. (that’s a windbag) … you no good for nothing Follis Aurae.

7. Posted: Tue Oct 07, 2003 4:49 pm
The classification Follis Aurae is quite an accurate one for a windbag such as yourself. No, you’re a rusty old fool and clinging on the one of the most hateful, idiotic, scientifically inaccurate and inhumane systems of belief. … You’re a coward.

Written by Bread:

1. Posted: Sat Oct 04, 2003 3:19 am
Comprehension skills do not seem your forte. … Comprehension deficiency again … The Muslamoid ``scholar``

2. Posted: Tue Oct 07, 2003 1:05 am
Yopu proved a coward and a liar, a braggart and an incompertent in defending the supposed religion you have, … it was entertaining to deal with an arrogant ignoramus

Written by Everybee:

1. Posted: Sat Oct 11, 2003 12:47 pm
An Islamic Scholar followed by a derogatory picture.

Being a very considered Muslim I agree that I have to try harder against any form of adversity, even when it comes in the forms found in the irrefutable evidence I just provided you with.

Nevertheless, I will make extra efforts to continue finding ways for you to go back to the original issues you claim to have with the Quran in general.

However, can you narrow it to one very specific issue and try to present is in somewhat more scholarly form than you have succeeded so far?

On my account I will lower the bar to accommodate you as much as possible in regards to your knowledge on such subjects.

Wassalam

rand

Joined: 28 Jul 2002
Posts: 1752

Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2003 5:41 pm Post subject:

StopNot wrote:

Quote:

Rand wrote:

Quote:

I don't know what the law was in 7th century Arabia, but presumably, the authorities then were not as advanced as the authorities today.

Quote:

Dear Stopnot,

I believe in using my own mind, and to listen to views of scholars. Based on my own mind, and after much introspection:
I felt that the quran contains barbaric verses, the koran contains logical fallacies, grammatical mistakes, etc.

Quote:

[4.56] (As for) those who disbelieve in Our communications, We shall make them enter fire; so oft as their skins are thoroughly burned, We will change them for other skins, that they may taste the chastisement; surely Allah is Mighty, Wise.

Quote:

[8.12] When your Lord revealed to the angels: I am with you, therefore make firm those who believe. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them.

Islam is based on blind faith

Quote:

Volume 9, Book 93, Number 477: bukhari
Narrated Masruq:
'Aisha said, "If anyone tells you that Muhammad has seen his Lord, he is a liar, for Allah says: 'No vision can grasp Him.' (6.103) And if anyone tells you that Muhammad has seen the Unseen, he is a liar, for Allah says: "None has the knowledge of the Unseen but Allah."

The prophet was barbaric

Quote:

Volume 8, Book 82, Number 795: bukhari
Narrated Anas:
The Prophet cut off the hands and feet of the men belonging to the tribe of 'Uraina and did not cauterise (their bleeding limbs) till they died.

Quote:

Volume 8, Book 82, Number 794: Sahih Bukhari
Narrated Anas:
Some people from the tribe of 'Ukl came to the Prophet and embraced Islam. The climate of Medina did not suit them, so the Prophet ordered them to go to the (herd of milch) camels of charity and to drink, their milk and urine (as a medicine). They did so, and after they had recovered from their ailment (became healthy) they turned renegades (reverted from Islam) and killed the shepherd of the camels and took the camels away. The Prophet sent (some people) in their pursuit and so they were (caught and) brought, and the Prophets ordered that their hands and legs should be cut off and that their eyes should be branded with heated pieces of iron, and that their cut hands and legs should not be cauterized, till they die.

But, you explained that I should not follow my own mind, but I should follow authorities. So I quoted authorities demonstrating that Muhammad was a pedophile and guilty of statutory rape.
You now explain how some authorities are fallible. The gets back to my original question. If authorities such as jewish, christian, muslim, atheistic, hindu, etc. differ how do we know which is the true authority?
==
Regarding moral relativism. In certain societies, it is considered immodest for women to not wear a veil. In other contexts, it is acceptable for women to wear shorts and a t-shirt. Would you agree with that?
==
http://www.submission.org/salat-introduction.html writes:

Quote:

Salat (Contact Prayers) are obligatory at dawn, noon, mid-afternoon, sunset and nightfall, and thus determine the rhythm of the entire day.

In ancient cultures, there were no lights, and so the day would begin at dawn/sunrise and end at sunset. Today we live in a 9-5 society. Given moral relativism, shouldn't the hours of prayer be revised?
===
I will explain my understanding of statutory rape. If someone offered a child a toy for expensive jewelry, and the child agreed, I would consider that stealing, as the child does not understand the market value of jewelry.
In the same way, a six-year-old cannot understand the concept of marriage. It is absurd for a 50-year-old to tell me that a six-year-old agreed to marry him. Does a 6-year-old understand the concept of marriage, the responsibilities of having children, the consequences if the husband becomes terminally ill, etc. She doesn't understand that. She was therefore raped.
A prophet should be concerned about the welfare of his people. A 6-year-old cannot help him make important decisions concerning the welfare of the people. But this was about his harem.
But let's discuss moral relativism. According to ancient authorities, why should a leader even waste his time marrying a woman, especially a six-year-old? Certainly, women then were not intelligent (according to the authorities) so it probably was statutory rape in those days, as they were not able to undersytand marriage well enough to consent.

http://members.aye.net/~abrupt/house/islam7.html writes:

Quote:

Islam considers women to be inferior creatures. Muhammad himself once said that he would "never touch the hand of women" because women were viewed as unclean temptresses. In addition to the humiliating dress code, women are thought to be half-human and in need of guidance:

Quote:

For instance, the second caliph Omar said, "Prevent the women from learning to write! Say no to their capricious ways." He also remarked, "Adopt positions opposite those of women. There is great merit in such opposition."

Quote:

Ali, Mohammed's cousin and the fourth caliph, said that "The entire woman is evil and what is worse is that it is a necessary evil! ... You should never ask a woman her advice because her advice is worthless. Hide them so that they cannot see other men! ... Do not spend too much time in their company for they will lead you to your downfall! ... Men, never ever obey your women. Never let them advise you on any matter concerning your daily life ... They have three qualities worthy of an unbeliever: they complain of being oppressed when in fact it is they who oppress; they take solemn oaths and at the same time lie; they make a show of refusing the advances of men when in fact they long for them ardently. Let us implore God's help to escape their sorcery."

Quote:

The Muslim scholar al-Ghazali, living in the eleventh century, wrote that the Muslim woman should stay at home and get on with her spinning, she should not go out often, she must not be well-informed, nor must she be communicative with her neighbours and only visit them when absolutely necessary ... her sole worry should be her virtue, her home as well as her prayers and her fast ... she should be clean and ready to satisfy her husband's sexual needs at any moment.

al-Ghazali goes on to say that Allah has punished women in eighteen separate ways, including:

menstruation
pregnancy
childbirth
lesser share in inheritances
liability for divorce but inability to initiate divorce
seclusion
exclusion from many religious rituals and ceremonies
disqualification for positions as rulers and judges

Do you believe the above description of women apply today? If not should the sharia laws of women be revised?

Best regards,
Rand

stopnot

Joined: 15 Apr 2003
Posts: 252
Location: inside your screen

Posted: Mon Oct 13, 2003 9:24 pm Post subject:

Rand wrote:

Quote:

But, you explained that I should not follow my own mind, but I should follow authorities.

Assalamu Alaikum rand,

No I did not. Instead I gave examples with reaching personal opinion known as ra’i. That ra’i can also be used to deterring which is the right authority.

Quote:

If authorities such as jewish, christian, muslim, atheistic, hindu, etc. differ how do we know which is the true authority?

By using ra’I and faith, among other faculties. Humans’ affairs are not as simple as you think.

Quote:

In the same way, a six-year-old cannot understand the concept of marriage.

Mostlikely not in it its entirety.

Quote:

It is absurd for a 50-year-old to tell me that a six-year-old agreed to marry him.

You may think so be so but there was a legal guardian of the girl responsible for the well-being of the child. This is even more emphasised when this happens to be the parent of the child.

Quote:

Does a 6-year-old understand the concept of marriage, the responsibilities of having children, the consequences if the husband becomes terminally ill, etc.

In a child-like manner children do understand such concepts. That is way children all around the world play parents/children games, hospital/doctors/patients games; war games etc. etc.

Enactment of a concept is evidence that there is some cognitive awareness. That is to say, children do have views on how family/hospital/wars function without knowing these concepts in their respective entireties.

Quote:

She doesn't understand that.

This is strictly your presumption of the event. Rather presumptuous but nevertheless yours alone.

Quote:

She was therefore raped.

Not a shred of evidence! Just wall-to-wall presumptions!

Quote:

Certainly, women then were not intelligent (according to the authorities) so it probably was statutory rape in those days, as they were not able to undersytand marriage well enough to consent.

Or, please! Sexism par excellence!

Quote:

Do you believe the above description of women apply today?

I definitely do not! According to the same documents Aisha is highly regarded as a very intelligent woman. Any Muslim can tell you that!

Quote:

If not should the sharia laws of women be revised?

Yes, not because of that but because it is possible.

Wassalam

rand

Joined: 28 Jul 2002
Posts: 1752

Posted: Tue Oct 14, 2003 5:00 am Post subject:

StopNot wrote:

Quote:

No I did not. Instead I gave examples with reaching personal opinion known as ra’i. That ra’i can also be used to deterring which is the right authority.

Then according to your own personal opinion, do you think the verses below ethical or barbaric?

Quote:

[5.33] The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His apostle and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement,

Quote:

[4.91] You will find others who desire that they should be safe from you and secure from their own people; as often as they are sent back to the mischief they get thrown into it headlong; therefore if they do not withdraw from you, and (do not) offer you peace and restrain their hands, then seize them and kill them wherever you find them; and against these We have given.you a clear authority.

Quote:

[5.38] And (as for) the man who steals and the woman who steals, cut off their hands as a punishment for what they have earned, an exemplary punishment from Allah; and Allah is Mighty, Wise.

Quote:

[4.34] Men are the maintainers of women because Allah has made some of them to excel others and because they spend out of their property; the good women are therefore obedient, guarding the unseen as Allah has guarded; and (as to) those on whose part you fear desertion, admonish them, and leave them alone in the sleeping-places and beat them; then if they obey you, do not seek a way against them; surely Allah is High, Great.

====
I wrote:

Quote:

It is absurd for a 50-year-old to tell me that a six-year-old agreed to marry him.

stopnot responded:

Quote:

You may think so be so but there was a legal guardian of the girl responsible for the well-being of the child. This is even more emphasised when this happens to be the parent of the child.

It is comforting to know that. Yes women needn't consent to marriage let their guardians decide for them.

Jan Goodwin wrote "The price of Honor: Muslim women lift the veil of silence on the Islamic world"

Jan Goodwin page 1

Quote:

It began with Maria. She entered my life for a brief while when she was nine years old. I lost her two years later to a world that I then little understood. I was the mother she did not have, and she was the daughter I had never given birth to. The last time I saw her, she was sobbing bitterly. Between gasps for breaths, she said she wanted to kill herself. I shuddered as she said it, the shock no less than it had been the first time she spoke it six months before.

The final image of her is her face pale with grief, her brown eyes as dark as the deep shadows under them that no eleven-year-old should have. She moved stiffly, the bruises from her most recent beating still vivid. Maria was a bargaining chip in an auction that was closed to outsiders. I never saw her again, but there isn't a day that I don't think about her, wonder how she is, and ask myself, Could I have done more to stop the apparent inevitability of what happened to her?

In trying to locate her afterward, the cultural barriers came down to close me out as effectively as the four walls of purdah that went up and now cofine her. A year later, I was told that Maria, still weeks short of her twelfth birthday, was pregnant with her first child. Forcibly married, she had been traded off at the age of eleven to a man described to me as "already having two wives, and so old he has lost all his teeth and shakes all the time," possibly from Parkinson's disease. In exchange for Maria, the ancient bridegroom had given one of his daughters to Maria's father, a widower who had wanted to remarry and could not afford the bride-price.

===
I wrote:

Quote:

Certainly, women then were not intelligent (according to the authorities) so it probably was statutory rape in those days, as they were not able to undersytand marriage well enough to consent.

stop not responded:

Quote:

Or, please! Sexism par excellence!

I quoted ancient Islamic authorities that had sexist views. Why don't you argue for moral relativism, and explain that in those days those views were reasonable but not today? Therefore, you can revise your religion with regards women's rights.
===
Stopnot wrote:

Quote:

I definitely do not! According to the same documents Aisha is highly regarded as a very intelligent woman. Any Muslim can tell you that!

Below are some quotes from Aisha. Show me some very inteligent sayings from Ayesha?

Quote:

Volume 4, Book 52, Number 43: Sahih Bukhari
Narrated 'Aisha:
(That she said), "O Allah's Apostle! We consider Jihad as the best deed. Should we not fight in Allah's Cause?" He said, "The best Jihad (for women) is Hajj-Mabrur (i.e. Hajj which is done according to the Prophet's tradition and is accepted by Allah)."

Quote:

Volume 8, Book 78, Number 618:Sahih Bukhari
Narrated 'Aisha:
Abu Bakr As-Siddiq had never broken his oaths till Allah revealed the expiation for the oaths. Then he said, "If I take an oath to do something and later on I find something else better than the first one, then I do what is better and make expiation for my oath."

Quote:

Volume 8, Book 81, Number 792:Sahih Bukhari
Narrated 'Aisha:
The Prophet cut off the hand of a lady, and that lady used to come to me, and I used to convey her message to the Prophet and she repented, and her repentance was sincere.

Quote:

Volume 1, Book 4, Number 149:
Narrated 'Aisha:
The Prophet said to his wives, "You are allowed to go out to answer the call of nature. "

Quote:

Volume 1, Book 4, Number 169:
Narrated 'Aisha:
The Prophet used to like to start from the right side on wearing shoes, combing his hair and cleaning or washing himself and on doing anything else.

Quote:

Volume 1, Book 4, Number 222:
Narrated 'Aisha:
(the mother of faithful believers) A child was brought to Allah's Apostle and it urinated on the garment of the Prophet. The Prophet asked for water and poured it over the soiled place.

Quote:

Volume 1, Book 6, Number 296:
Narrated 'Aisha:
The Prophet used to lean on my lap and recite Qur'an while I was in menses.

Quote:

Volume 1, Book 6, Number 299:
Narrated 'Abdur-Rahman bin Al-Aswad:
(on the authority of his father) 'Aisha said: "Whenever Allah's Apostle wanted to fondle anyone of us during her periods (menses), he used to order her to put on an Izar and start fondling her." 'Aisha added, "None of you could control his sexual desires as the Prophet could."

Quote:

Volume 1, Book 8, Number 401:
Narrated 'Aisha:
(the mother of faithful believers) Allah's Apostle saw some nasal secretions, expectoration or sputum on the wall of the mosque in the direction of the Qibla and scraped it off.

Quote:

Volume 1, Book 8, Number 445:
Narrated 'Aisha:
Once I saw Allah's Apostle at the door of my house while some Ethiopians were playing in the mosque (displaying their skill with spears). Allah's Apostle was screening me with his Rida' so as to enable me to see their display. ('Urwa said that 'Aisha said, "I saw the Prophet and the Ethiopians were playing with their spears.")

Quote:

Volume 1, Book 9, Number 490:
Narrated 'Aisha:
The things which annul the prayers were mentioned before me. They said, "Prayer is annulled by a dog, a donkey and a woman (if they pass in front of the praying people)." I said, "You have made us (i.e. women) dogs. I saw the Prophet praying while I used to lie in my bed between him and the Qibla. Whenever I was in need of something, I would slip away. for I disliked to face him."

Quote:

Volume 1, Book 11, Number 640:
Narrated 'Aisha:
The Prophet said, "If supper is served, and Iqama is pronounced one should start with the supper."

Quote:

Volume 4, Book 53, Number 332:
Narrated Ibn Abu Mulaika:
'Aisha said, "The Prophet died in my house on the day of my turn while he was leaning on my chest closer to my neck, and Allah made my saliva mix with his Saliva." 'Aisha added, "'AbdurRahman came with a Siwak and the Prophet was too weak to use it so I took it, chewed it and then (gave it to him and he) cleaned his teeth with it."

Quote:

Volume 8, Book 81, Number 778:
Narrated 'Aisha:
Usama approached the Prophet on behalf of a woman (who had committed theft). The Prophet said, "The people before you were destroyed because they used to inflict the legal punishments on the poor and forgive the rich. By Him in Whose Hand my soul is! If Fatima (the daughter of the Prophet ) did that (i.e. stole), I would cut off her hand."

I wrote:

Quote:

If not should the sharia laws of women be revised?

You responded:

Quote:

Yes, not because of that but because it is possible.

Other then that you might personally disagree with some of Allah's laws, why would you think that the all-mighty, all-wise allah, who sent a messenger that needs to be obeyed, why don't you think His words need revision? And if they do, doesn't that imply that there is a discrepancy?

Best wishes,
Rand

Spinoza

Joined: 31 Dec 1969
Posts: 1214

Posted: Tue Oct 14, 2003 6:03 am Post subject:

stopnot wrote:

Spinoza wrote:

Quote:

No, he quoted some of the most applicable authorities possible. Who else would you quote in case of child rape?

Assalamu Alaikum Spinoza,

Please refrain from using that greeting to me. I do not appreciate it.

Quote:

OK, but where is the word ‘rape’ in these authoritative documents linked to the marital status of prophet Muhammad.

Yes, it is: it’s called statutory rape, because a 6 year old cannot make such decisions for herself. A 6 year old child is not fit for marriage. A 50 year old man fantasising about a 6 year old and having sex with a 9 year old is a paedophile. Period.

Quote:

The fact is that it is not found there but in the minds of some men like yourself.

It is rape by definition: *any* adult man humping a 9 year old still a pedophile.

Quote:

The documentary evidence which reports child rape!

Well okay, that would be the hadiths that clearly state Aisha was 6 when Mo married her and 9 when he ‘consummated’ his marriage. Do I really need to re-quote those to someone like you?

Quote:

Offcourse there is relativity issue here but you intentionally avoid it.

No there is NOT. Mohammed is God’s final messenger, God’s most trusted man on earth. Mo is the prime example even for Muslims to follow up onto this day, everywhere on earth. Even if a perverted society condones sex with children there is NO way I or anyone should try down play the horror of such an event. In the 17th and 18th century most white Europeans driven by greed, racisms and utter contempt for human life captures millions of black Africans and used them as slaves. There is *no* reason why such behaviour should be excused.

Because of this 'perfect' example Mahomet set young girls are still married of to dirty old man in many parts of the world. It's sickening. Only a prophet of a very evil power would do such a thing and set such a horrible example.

Quote:

and that is why you are using the yard stick of today in the west to measure an event which took place in 7th century Arabia.

Well, that makes a whole lot more sense than using the yard stick of 7th century Arabian perverted ‘prophet’ to measure events today.

Quote:

If you were to be truthfull you could point to the facts as alluded by the material posted by rand on Mon Oct 13, 2003 7:21 am which I have commented above:

Quote:

Statutory rape was codified into English law more than 700 years ago when it became illegal …

No because the answer is: we have developed quite a bit beyond the morals of feudal England of the 13th century. If Mahomet was a Prophet for all times for all mankind to follow he should have wedded a 6 year old. That is *sick*.

Quote:

He didn't rape a child,

Yes he did, there’s no way a 6 year old can consort to a marriage, there is no way a 9 year old is mentally and physically ready to have sex with a 50 year old. It is sick, no matter what perverted tribe or marauding band of highway robbers may have condoned it.

Quote:

and if he did people would surely point at his rather 'human' behaviour to debunk his claim according to your theory.

That’s like saying: Hitler couldn’t have done all these evil things, the German people would have stopped him from gassing the Jews. The people that did openly criticize Mahomet (or Hitler) didn’t live very long.

Mahomet was a very powerful man indeed, who would ‘receive’ all sorts of convenient ‘revelations’ (it’s not a coincidence this word is related to the word dream) at the weirdest of times.

Quote:

You sound a bit confused a bit here: are you saying that Muhammad was not human? Islamic primary sources are replete with refutation of the issue.

I’ve never said such a thing. Stop pretending that I have.

Quote:

I find that to be a *very* racist argument. I know many fine Austrians and they are amongst the most cultured and polite peoples of the world.

Do you know? I happen to have lived in Austria for nearly a year in the early 80’s and have keen interest in its affairs.

So? That doesn’t make any of that remark any less racist.

Quote:

Don’t you know who Jorg Hider is and that he was the leader of the Freedom party (FPO) in Austria for many years and only has stepped from being a leader, but is still behind the front line of politics?

Well at least I know how to spell their names properly, so how that? Jörg Haider and his FPÖ don´t make that remark of yours less racist.

Quote:

Wassalam

You still haven’t picked a bride for that nice bearded fellow.

Spinoza

Joined: 31 Dec 1969
Posts: 1214

Posted: Tue Oct 14, 2003 6:10 am Post subject:

Quote:

Before I answer your critical question let me see the evidence of what I have been called so far so far highlight in bold:

So I called you:

- a coward (for not answering someone's questions)
- a bag of air (Follis Aurae) for barging in like a 'scholar' but not bringing anything of substance to the table
- a rusty old fool for clining on to your false religion.

None of these was an ad homimen (since none were used as an argument) and none of these things is remotely as 'nasty' as the things your religion has to say about me.

None of the other comments you cited was directed at you, so stop whining.

stopnot

Joined: 15 Apr 2003
Posts: 252
Location: inside your screen

Posted: Tue Oct 14, 2003 6:26 am Post subject:

spinoza wrote:

Quote:

Please refrain from using that greeting to me. I do not appreciate it.

When in Italy you’ll be greeted in Italian because there they have Italians there, when in Greece you’ll be greeted in Greek because there they have Greeks there, and when in cyber space you’ll be greeted in Arabic because there they have Arabic saluting Muslims there.

If you do not appreciate being saluted in Italian do not go to Italy or interact with Italians, if you do not appreciate being saluted in Greek do not go to Greece or interact with Greeks. Likewise, if you do not appreciate being saluted in Arabic do not go to cyber space or interact with Arabis and/or Muslims there.

Quote:

Well at least I know how to spell their names properly, so how that? Jörg Haider and his FPÖ don´t make that remark of yours less racist.

Since you are so familiar why don’t you read Schwarzenegger’ comments in original and see whether he is being racist or I for reporting on it?

Wassalam

Display posts from previous:

	Faith Freedom International Forum Index -> Reader's Comments On This Forum	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 Next
Page 6 of 8

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum