If Mohammed was a paedophile then so were about 75% of the people of the time.
Printable View
If Mohammed was a paedophile then so were about 75% of the people of the time.
Exactly, and he fails to realize this.Quote:
Originally Posted by Avlvs Libvrnivs Britannicvs Maximvs
do you have any evidence for that?
i believe that the general range at which people got married etc was a little younger than is standard now, but i dont think it was common for men to have sex with 9yr olds.
no i dont. i do dispute that everyone was doing this.Quote:
Originally Posted by Patriarch of Constantinople
however even if you are right and paedophilia was endemic in arabia i still dont think it provides a justification.
i would hope a spiritual/moral leader would challenge this practice rather than endorse it.
i think having sex with 9yr old is evil which ever way you look at it.
Where did you hear he had sex with her? Please.Doesn't sound like a pedophile to me.Quote:
Some of Muhammad's companions were "shocked by the way he allowed his wives to stand up to him and answer him back. Muhammad regularly helped with household chores, mended his own clothes, prepared his food and took his wives’ advice seriously. On one occasion Umm Salamah helped him to prevent a mutiny."
Dispute? You flat out said you didn't believe in the whole "times changed" thing. And maybe a person shouldn't target the bad things of someone's life than remember the good things he has done.Quote:
Originally Posted by KARTLOS
Justification? It was normal. No one needed justification. That's only today. They didn't think it was wrong.Quote:
however even if you are right and paedophilia was endemic in arabia i still dont think it provides a justification.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patriarch of Constantinople
why because paedophiles cant do housework?? i dont get your point.
Point is, is that he was a hard working, just, respectable man. No where in that paragraph said he had sex with 9 year olds.Quote:
Originally Posted by KARTLOS
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patriarch of Constantinople
dont target the "bad things"! - oh the small matter of haveing sex with children, - why are you trying to trivialise child abuse?
HE DIDN'T HAVE SEX WITH CHILDREN! YOU NEVER HAVE BROUGHT UP ONE PIECE OF EVIDENCE PROVING THAT!Quote:
Originally Posted by KARTLOS
ive taken this from the wikipedia page i posted:
this is from the hadith of bukhari - generally regarded as the most authorative by sunnis.
According to Urwah ibn al-Zubayr:
Khadija died three years before the Prophet departed to Medina. He stayed there for two years or so and then he married 'Aisha when she was a girl of six years of age, and he consummated that marriage when she was nine years old.[10]
According to Aisha:
the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years (i.e., till his death).[11]
According to Ursa ibn al-Zubayr:
The Prophet wrote the (marriage contract) with 'Aisha while she was six years old and consummated his marriage with her while she was nine years old and she remained with him for nine years (i.e. till his death).[12]
you do realise what consumating a marriage is dont you?
You do realize wikipedia isn't a great source, seeing as people can edit it and put in things they want to hear. Look, no matter how hard you try, I always will believe Mohammed wasn't a pedophile. I think the argument against that claim is far stronger than the one for the claim.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patriarch of Constantinople
if thats the case why do the majority of muslims accept the ages of 6 and 9 as being true??
the general position of islamic scholars is not to argue with the dates but they would dispute the interpretation that he was a paedophile.
they say that she was a mature girl for her age, and she was the only v young girl he slept with and thus there is not a consistent pattern of paedophile behaviour.
they also argue that the reason he waited 3 years was that he was waiting for her to start puberty - thus he did not have a thing for pre-pubescents
an alternative interpretation for the delay of three years comes from accounts that aisha was quite ill for a while and her hair fell out! - so mohammed had to wait for her to get better
i disagree with this interpretation. i think someone who defiles a 9yr old is a paedophile regardless of whether on not they started puberty.
That nailed it. She was mature. She wasn't a minor (she was by today's standards). Why do so many believe he was? Well, because that's what they believe in. I'm not arguing what the believe, and you seem to always bring that up.Quote:
Originally Posted by KARTLOS
And a person who defiles a maid even though he is married is right, huh?Quote:
i disagree with this interpretation. i think someone who defiles a 9yr old is a paedophile regardless of whether on not they started puberty
i give up on you mate, it seems you are determined to trivialise what mohammed did. i find your whole attitude very disturbing.
Disturbing? Disturbing that I don't agree with you? Disturbing that I will defend a prophet of his religion?Quote:
Originally Posted by KARTLOS
This is an extremely controversial thread, and should be in the backroom. Patriarch of Constantinople is right in some ways. Those were very different times, what was acceptable then is not acceptable now. Technically it is still paedophilia, but it may have been social or cultural pressures that pushed him into the marriage and not paedophilic tendencies. Polygamy is a very different thing though, to child abuse, because polygamy harms none. And if those involved with such a lifestyle are happy with it, they should be allowed to continue. So any argument comparing these is totally redundant.
It was common practice in those times for men to marry girls who were significantly younger than them, even children. However, it was not common practice to consummate that marriage before the girl was about thirteen years of age, the time when she entered puberty and thus child bearing age. I may be wrong, but human beings are not supposed to be attracted to people who are at an age when reproduction is impossible, as it does not make biological sense.
Sadly it does - somebody wants the child as a wife when she gets older. So the man in question decides to marry her before some other person gets their hands on her.
taken from Wikipedia, but the Dutch version:
Because Aïsja was too young the wedding was possponed till after the migration in 622. According to muslimchronologist Tabari she stayed with her parents till she reached puberty. Some, like Bukhari and Muslim, say that Aïsja was 6 years old then, others, like Ibn Ishak and Tabari, say that she was something like 12 and 14 years old. Or maybe even older. Muslims themselves consider Bukhari to be the one that is most right, which means for them that the minimal marriage-age for women under the shari'ah is 9 years old.Quote:
Omdat Aïsja nog te jong was werd het huwelijk uitgesteld tot na de migratie, in 622. Volgens moslimchronoloog Tabari bleef zij in het huis van haar ouders wonen en werd de verloving pas geconsumeerd toen Aïsja de puberteit bereikt had. Er zijn overleveringen in de hadithverzamelingen zoals die van Bukhari en Muslim, die zeggen dat Aïsja toen zes jaar oud was. Maar er zijn ook andere overleveringen zoals in Ibn Ishak en Tabari, die aangeven dat Aïsja tussen 12 en 14 jaar zou kunnen zijn geweest, of zelfs nog ouder. Moslims beschouwen de hadithverzameling van Bukhari als de meest gezaghebbende, wat inhoudt dat de minimale huwelijksleeftijd voor vrouwen onder de shari'ah negen jaar is.
So who says she was 9?
And according to me Henry is right
To topic starter - here are 4 things to think about which you seem to forget:
- if a prophet would happen to be paedophile, that doesn't affect whether his ideology is good or not. Say if Jesus would be a paedophile, would you dislike Christian ideology (or if you already dislike it, would you dislikt it more)? Or if say Einstein would be a paedophile, would his theory of relativity be wrong? Or conversely, if Stalin liked icecream does liking icecream make you a massmurderer? Persons and their ideologies must be judged separately
- there isn't much "evidence" for the young marriage age, and it seems to be just as much if not more evidence that the girl was in her twenties or so when the marriage took place
- there's nothing suggesting that marriage means sex (in modern western society marriage seems to even mean the end of sex :laugh4:). In fact many marriages of that time would have been diplomatical and political, and the man and woman wouldn't have any sex at all during their entire marriage. This could very well have been the case here
- in many modern child marriages the marriage is made official early, and the man and woman might even complete the ceremonies at a very early age such as 9 years old or younger, but they still won't have sex before reaching a decent age. From what I can tell, having sex on the wedding night isn't part of the marriage ritual outside western society
Calling Mohammed a paedophile is undeniably very good fun, on a dutch forum I also frequent once in a while a muslim shows up who feels the need to say only whites rape kids we are all closet pedophiles ladida, and all that would never happen in a muslim country blablabla, then it's the time to discuss what position Mohammed would have preffered when he split poor little Aischa like a log.
Doesn't mean he actually was of course, different times.
Thank-you LegioXXXUlpiaVictrix.
And why has this thread got it'self dumped here?
yes it is not a completely settled issue, i.e you cannot clai mwith 100% certainty that she was 6 +9, however this is age that is accepted by the majority of musimsQuote:
Originally Posted by Stig
that is in a way perhaps the most disturbing aspect, if this was a big secret then it would be understandable why there isnt much fuss made about it. instead it is something muslims generally accept as true - which means that they must explain away the relationship and portray it as "normal"
it has had a profoundly negative consequence for the protection of children in islamic countries. for example when the mullahs came in in iran they moved the age of consent down to 9 in accordance with mohammed own lifestyle.
here is ana article about wwidepsread child brides in western africa
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv...vory/ivory.htm
Tarrak accidentely moved it to the wrong backroom, and since he only has mod powers in the Monastry he can't move it away from here ... happens from time to time, nothing to do about it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Avlvs Libvrnivs Britannicvs Maximvs
i dont think your examples are great. einstein was a scientist not a moralist, if he turned out to be a paeodophile in would not mean that his work was erronous. his moral behaviour has no relation to his work.Quote:
Originally Posted by LegioXXXUlpiaVictrix
mohammed on the other hand was a moral authority. if he behaved in an immoral fashion then it SHOULD draw inot question his reliability as a source of moral guidance.
as to your final paragraph - yes obvioulsy marrying a child does not mean you have to have sex with them. In fact in this instance that is not what i am reporting - mohammed married the child when she was six and then consumated the marriage (had sex with the child) when she was 9.
as to your suggestions that it was a political marriage and he didnt have sex with her, i believe in fact that she was mohammeds preffered sexual partner to the point that it caused jealousy amongst his other wives.
what are backrooms for anyway? if you can stil post in them and read the threads what purpose do they serve?Quote:
Originally Posted by Stig
are they only accesible by full members or something?