Muhamed was a child molester.

a reply to: dukeofjive696969

The catholic church sickens me. So vile. The leaders rape children, and when they get busted in public, they just shuffle them around to another church. If they get busted in private, nothing happens. Sickening.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Jessie8802
a reply to: Thetan

Muhammad was engaged to a 6 year old and married her when she was 9 .

I found and posted credible sources that say other wise.

Your turn.

The interpretations of the quran are interesting. Although, I doubt that matters much to the main point of this thread. The main point is that if muhammed was divine, why did he push a young woman into a forced marrriage. Forced sex sucks. Being forced into a marriage sucks even more. These are things that are seen as immoral today. They are against freedom of the individual. If muhammed's morals could not go beyond the current day's culture, then what makes him anything more than a simple mortal human being?

I think the point of this thread is that mohammed's marriage of a young women shows his morality relies on his current days morals. Rather than divine inspiration.

originally posted by: blueman12

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Jessie8802
a reply to: Thetan

Muhammad was engaged to a 6 year old and married her when she was 9 .

I found and posted credible sources that say other wise.

Your turn.

The interpretations of the quran are interesting. Although, I doubt that matters much to the main point of this thread. The main point is that if muhammed was divine, why did he push a young woman into a forced marrriage.

Provide source for Forced Marriage.

Women of that era had to marry. They had no other options.

From research it appears it was a happy marriage.

originally posted by: Winstonian
Look at the mormons. Look what they did and went through in order to be established.

What did the Mormon's do?

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: blueman12

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Jessie8802
a reply to: Thetan

Muhammad was engaged to a 6 year old and married her when she was 9 .

I found and posted credible sources that say other wise.

Your turn.

The interpretations of the quran are interesting. Although, I doubt that matters much to the main point of this thread. The main point is that if muhammed was divine, why did he push a young woman into a forced marrriage.

Provide source for Forced Marriage.

Women of that era had to marry. They had no other options.

From research it appears it was a happy marriage.

O please.. Slaves of America were happy to be on a ranch with a master who didn't wip a slave on a daily basis. That doesn't still make it moral.

That just makes it slightly less bad. Like muhammed's marriage. Some women are happy to have slightlly less rights than men. They are happy to do this or that. Be this or that. Because that is what they are taught is good for society and their individual.

They don't know anything else. If muhammed was a divine being, he would have known better. He would have known a more evolved way. The fact that he followed in the footsteps of other men's morals, shows that he is mortal himself. He is nothing special.

originally posted by: Thetan
Yikes, this should be interesting:

All cases of an adult having sexual relations with a nine year old child is a case of child molestation.
Muhamed was an adult who had sexual relations with nine year old child.
Therefore, Muhamed was a child molester.


This is the argument. The only way to prove the conclusion wrong is to show that one or both of the premises is false.

www.thereligionofpeace.com...

OP. Back then in his time people lived way shorter lives. In todays standards YEs but in the past? NOPE.

originally posted by: blueman12

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: blueman12

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Jessie8802
a reply to: Thetan

Muhammad was engaged to a 6 year old and married her when she was 9 .

I found and posted credible sources that say other wise.

Your turn.

The interpretations of the quran are interesting. Although, I doubt that matters much to the main point of this thread. The main point is that if muhammed was divine, why did he push a young woman into a forced marrriage.

Provide source for Forced Marriage.

Women of that era had to marry. They had no other options.

From research it appears it was a happy marriage.

O please.. Slaves of America were happy to be on a ranch with a master who didn't wip a slave on a daily basis. That doesn't still make it moral.

That just makes it slightly less bad. Like muhammed's marriage. Some women are happy to have slightlly less rights than men. They are happy to do this or that. Be this or that. Because that is what they are taught is good for society and their individual.

They don't know anything else. If muhammed was a divine being, he would have known better. He would have known a more evolved way. The fact that he followed in the footsteps of other men's morals, shows that he is mortal himself. He is nothing special.

What does your rant have to do with what I posted?

a reply to: Annee

What does your post have to do with muhammed being a moral or divine figuare?

originally posted by: blueman12
a reply to: Annee

What does your post have to do with muhammed being a moral or divine figuare?

Moral? Who defines moral? You?

Divine? I have no interest. I'm atheist.

a reply to: blueman12

Hes only really concidered special because he brought peace and solidarity to all the waring factions of Islam at the time... sure people of that faith or belief system may attribute othher things to him, but thats basically what rose him to such a place as prophet. He brought peace... and the most respect one can say to a follower of Islam is peace be with you, its actually the major reason why its called the religion of peace... as that was a very common saying. Im sure if one were to astutely follow the path like any other it would also lead to peace. But externializing the jihad when it was supposed to be an internal battle to bring peace within so peace outside is there automatically? Id exactly what the extremists or to put very accurately wat the jihadists have done... externalize the internal struggle, that the evil is out there and following that pointing just makes everyone your enemy when the pointing was meant to be directed within to see or investigate where the enemy witin dwelled.

Of course that may have been an intentional twist of a concept, to whip propaganda to use people to their own adavantage to combat those wishing to undo corruption and human abuse stripping them from power to free the people. Of course those sitting in moral authority so corrupted and living a life of ease and excess are going to point at an enemy not themselves and twist scripture as an excuse to point elsewhere... this happens all over the world in every sector one can find a place of power over others and that temptation that arises from having such a seat of power is of course where the metaphorical jihad actually lay. Uproot it out of oneself? and theres only responsibility left to those that respect that position of authority. Doesnt matter whos in it though, as long as benevolent leader holds your life or death in their hands youre gonna submit... and thats where that wole idea of Isam moving from one of peace and unity is twisted into one of submission.

Sad business to have it usurped and divided doing basically the opposite of what the concidered prophet did... for selfish endeavors in a lust for power and control instead of that peace.

originally posted by: Winstonian
a reply to: Thetan

Can you imagine someone claiming that they were a prophet and then getting a bunch of people together to attack a military base?

This is pretty much why there is mass surveilence, might you recall Jim Jones or David Koresh or the many other cultists with influence over others that would incite them to nothing good for the ebenfit of people? Since our political system has 2 parties and a 3rd cant even compete with the ellectoral college in place, how many extremists both of those hold on either end? Not necessarily extremist in belief but ideologies... sometimes in the very politicans temselves when they ignore separation of church and state or take a corporate bribe and vote over the will of the majority.

a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
In Islam, Muhammad is al-Insān al-Kāmil (perfect human) and also known as uswa hasana (excellent model of conduct).
Today, Muhammad is held as Sunnah, the highest example (today) for a Muslim to to follow (today) in matters of faith and practice (today). Ask ANY Muslim cleric, even a "moderate" one, and he will tell you that the life of Muhammad is to be emulated by the faithful.

There is no similar command or moral imperative in the New Testament for the Christian to emulate violent or otherwise abhorrent Old Testament practices, only that the Christian must believe in Christ and follow His teachings. In fact, most Christians today are not Jewish like the first followers were, and are therefore expected to read and understand the Old Testament, but not to adhere to its Jewish prescriptive practices. And today's Jewish religious leadership has for the most part consistently moved with the times to make their laws and rules more in keeping with the modern age. Islam has not.

There is no provision for the Muslim to adapt his emulation of Muhammad to modern times. In fact, if he does so, he risks being labeled an apostate.

Which means that if a Muslim (today) is really adhering to he practices of Muhammad (today), he might feel justified in behaving this way (today); and this explains some of the more objectionable, yet nevertheless widespread, practices in the Islamic world (today) with regard to women's rights, child brides, slavery, and the like.

a reply to: OuttaHere

You are correct.

Sorry I did not read your post fully and had to ammend this as I was too quick on the trigger there.


Your points are excellent, there is an imperitive in the new testament to emulate Jesus as BEST we can as you know but of course only true saint's ever do.

originally posted by: Thetan
Yikes, this should be interesting:

All cases of an adult having sexual relations with a nine year old child is a case of child molestation.
Muhamed was an adult who had sexual relations with nine year old child.
Therefore, Muhamed was a child molester.


This is the argument. The only way to prove the conclusion wrong is to show that one or both of the premises is false.

www.thereligionofpeace.com...

Well I sure am glad that nothing like this ever took place in the Christian religion or the bible.

originally posted by: beyondtruth

originally posted by: Thetan
Yikes, this should be interesting:

All cases of an adult having sexual relations with a nine year old child is a case of child molestation.
Muhamed was an adult who had sexual relations with nine year old child.
Therefore, Muhamed was a child molester.


This is the argument. The only way to prove the conclusion wrong is to show that one or both of the premises is false.

www.thereligionofpeace.com...

Well I sure am glad that nothing like this ever took place in the Christian religion or the bible.

Ah yes, know who's the source of your website.The Religion of Peace

TheReligionOfPeace.Com and the Faulty “Islamic Terrorism Ticker”: If you visit JihadWatch, AtlasShrugs or any of the too numerous to count anti-Muslim hate sites and blogs, you are likely to find on the sidebar a hyperlinked image claiming that “Islamic Terrorists have carried out more than _____ Deadly Terror Attacks Since 9/11.” The image was created by the anti-Islam hate site, The Religion of Peace (TROP), associated with Islamophobe Daniel Greenfield, aka “SultanKnish,” who you will recall earns a pretty penny from the David Horowitz Freedom Center.

The clear visual intent of this “Islamic terrorism ticker” is to provoke an emotive fear and anxiety of a global, monolithic, totalitarian Islam (read: Muslims), that is waging terror everywhere through thousands upon thousands of unmitigated and random attacks. On TROP the “terror ticker” serves as ammunition for the site’s stated missionary proposition of portraying “Islam” as “the world’s worst religion.” It also aids in the attempt to tie terrorism to Islam.

Even a cursory glance at TROP’s list of so-called “Islamic terrorist attacks” reveals it to be nothing more than a deeply biased, propagandistic spin-job that conflates: real terrorist attacks, (semi)religious/culturally motivated crimes, attacks on military personnel and attacks by secular groups with no ideological basis in Islam — all in theaters of occupation, civil war and separatist conflict. www.loonwatch.com...

This is just to emphasize the cruel and vile practice is still prevalent in many Islamic Community's today, there are many muslim's and convert's to islam whom are denying there own book which is puzzling since if it is perfect as the believe then how do they deny what it said of there own leader and his child bride.
This child was only eleven which is of course older than Aisha was but for what she said she was later murdered, this is distressing so please watch only if you can take the emotional shock of knowing that fact.

www.rt.com...

www.dailymail.co.uk...

Today there are many devout Muslims whom refuse to believe this of there leader and think much the same as we do about these cultures in which is does happen but historically they are actually wrong as it was what muhammad did and not what we claim he did.
www.faithfreedom.org...
www.thereligionofpeace.com...
www.answering-islam.org...

www.answeringmuslims.com...

Get your head around this, the age of consent in the Vatican is 12!

Yep an enclosed nation of celibate priests, nuns and monks has an age of consent! And it's only 12!!! Can somebody explain this please!

originally posted by: beyondtruth

originally posted by: Thetan
Yikes, this should be interesting:

All cases of an adult having sexual relations with a nine year old child is a case of child molestation.
Muhamed was an adult who had sexual relations with nine year old child.
Therefore, Muhamed was a child molester.


This is the argument. The only way to prove the conclusion wrong is to show that one or both of the premises is false.

www.thereligionofpeace.com...

Well I sure am glad that nothing like this ever took place in the Christian religion or the bible.

Heres a thought. Adam and eve werent aging in the garden of eden. They were both under age by todays laws.

As to th e vatican. THAT is why jesus didnt wan a organized religon. Because of corruption. BEtter to have individual relationships with God and jesus.

originally posted by: Sublimecraft
Girls this same age (and younger) are still pushed into arranged marriages today - this goes well beyond Wahhabism. Look at India for instance, female child brides (to adult men) is common practice among many families and in many of these cases it's horrific what abuse can and has ensued - and that's a mainly Hindu nation.

Get your facts right. You're talking through your hat. Child marriages are prohibited in India by the Prohibition of Child Marriage Act, 2006. These child marriages are now few and far between. Note that these children are not allowed to meet until after they reach adulthood after which there's a 'second 'marriage' when they are then allowed to stay together. However admittedly, there are very few cases where children below the prescribed ages are made to stay together.

So there's no question of sex before this.

originally posted by: angeldoll

originally posted by: MysterX

originally posted by: angeldoll

originally posted by: MysterX
a reply to: angeldoll

Ah...but that's opening up a whole new can 'o worms...is it ethical to genetically fiddle with a child?

Artificial insemination is essentially what the 'Virgin birth' describes, (even holy artificial insemination is what it is) yet today, we would feel that to be as unethical as having outright intercourse with a young girl wouldn't we?

Yeah, I think you and a couple of other people need to go make a thread on what an utter piece of garbage/trash the Christian God is. Maybe it will may you feel good, knowing you have moral superiority over God.


While you are vilifying God, you can point out how super cool Mohammed was, and deserving of all the billions of worshipers who follow him to this day.


/out

Considering i have killed nobody, accidentally or deliberately...in that regard at the very least, I AM morally superior to anyone, or any deity who has murderd people...wouldn't you agree with that?

That goes equally for any religious organisation or the deity they worship.

It's an inescapable fact, if one considers murder to be morally and ethically wrong of course.

Noted. Here is an ATS member who claims to be superior to God.

Are you willing to say you are Mohammad's superior too, or are you too much of pussy to say that?

You say 'noted', but that isn't really so...is it. Either you're posting finger is a little too itchy, or you are deliberately reading only what you want to read, and ignoring salient points in my posts...or you're in dire need of new comprehension spectacles.

You claim i single out your 'god' (whomever or whatever that might be) for special comment, and insinuate that i'm somehow giving Muslims and their 'god' (whomever or whatever that might be) a free ride...so, i can only reiterate what i have ALREADY said above...i can post the pertinent points in bold and underlined, if it'll make it easier for you to read a second time?

"Considering i have killed nobody, accidentally or deliberately...in that regard at the very least, I AM morally superior to anyone, or any deity who has murderd people.."

And;

"That goes equally for any religious organisation or the deity they worship."

As you can CLEARLY see...i have included ALL (as in...you know...ALL of them) religions, and the mythical deities they claim to worship, in my statement and singled out none for special mention or consideration.

The intent being to state the inescapable fact, that if we consider murder to be a morally offensive and repugnant act, i, having killed nobody, am indeed superior IN THAT REGARD AT LEAST, when compared to those people within religious groups who murder others or their religious books include mention of their deities murdering people.

Got that now or do you wanna try again?