Does Islam, in fact, Encourage Paedophilia?

Re: # 376

If what u say is true then Muhammed no better than a lifafa(i.e. envelopes get us msgs and Muhammed worked as a stenographer to take down the notes of Al-Lah).

I think he's more than a lifafa.

in #376 read "This time of history reading is much more accurate "

as "This type of history reading is much more accurate

The purpose behind the charge of Islamic Paedophilia, similar to the charge of Islamic Terrorism is ulterior political motive. The moralizing a-holes, who cover up their own barbarism behind sanitizing slogans, want to prove that Islam is immorality par excellence. Not only do they fail in proving that, their methodology itself reveals their moronic nature.

First, they use unreliable "historical" (if they can be called that) sources. Critical reading of those sources and cross referencing them with other time-line events reveals that Ayesha's age could not have been nine (rather over 16). See this link. This time of history reading is much more accurate than the he-said, she-said verbatim report reading of the mullahs and the other moralizing morons.

Second, the messenger's relationship with Islam, and his commission by Allah was for the delivery of the message ONLY. A message that absolutely does not allow marrying anyone who has not biologically reached puberty, by referring to it as "age of marriage" (mentioned concomitantly with sound judgment), and similarly clothing requirements (which have never included a burqa but an extra bosom covering only) are different after menopause, when this extra requirement is no longer in effect.

If the messenger went contrary to the message this does not at all invalidate or reflect badly on the Quran. His recompense, as the recompense of all is due unto Allah. When the mullah canonizes every aspect of his supposed lifestyle into "Islam" not only is that an outrage against the spirit of the Quran, it amounts to inventing lies against Allah.

Finally, all this paedophilia mongering amounts to Ad Hominem arguments that the moralizing morons and the sob's among the Hindus use in trying to discredit Islam. For whom and for the mullahs one aya of the Quran will suffice as a "slam-dunk" answer:


[2:141] Those were a people from the past. They are responsible for what they earned, and you are responsible for what you earned. You are not answerable for anything they did.

That is what I call a "slam dunk"!

Anything else you "Islam-hating", "West-worshipping" moronic hypocrites want to argue about??

man! cut tahmed some slack, atleast he is not asking for everyones blood like peemax and fartboom. tahmed's is the tolerant face of islam. stupid but tolerant.

Spot on Harish.

Unwashed Abduls! LOL.

#372 by Folio

If this is the face of Paki elite, it is better to deal with the unwashed Abduls. They're any day better than the deliberate and dishonest tahmeds. At least they're more honest and upfront, so what if misguided?

If you look at Pakistan's history, more often than not, it is elites like these who've brought the country to its brink.

Harish,

I think what Sattar wrote in 363 is closer:

"So take a dose of humility Sahib. Stop trying to validate your faith and stop telling everyone what is wrong with their faiths. You are a miserable, pathetic fool and an idiot with delusions of self-righteousness. Other than that, you might be an ok guy … (wide grin)".

#326 Posted by tahmed32

Harish_Hyd: You obviously didnt get the above point when I wrote my post #156. To bad. I take all this trouble, providing examples from history, and I might as well be talking to a blank wall (as my schoolteacher would no doubt have said). :-(

Don't act smarter than you really are. Your so-called "examples from history"? You said Hindus perpetrate the most suicide bombings in the world and cited Hitler as an example of Christian terrorism. When challenged to prove your assertions, you respond with vague inanities. You are just a shallow man who pretends to be an elderly intellectual. Thanks again for proving PewResearch, Arjun, Sattar and a lot of other guys (most of them Pakis) true.

#326 Posted by tahmed32

Harish_Hyd: You obviously didnt get the above point when I wrote my post #156. To bad. I take all this trouble, providing examples from history, and I might as well be talking to a blank wall (as my schoolteacher would no doubt have said). :-(

Don't act smarter than you really are. Your so-called "examples from history"? You said Hindus perpetrate the most suicide bombings in the world and cited Hitler as an example of Christian terrorism. When challenged to prove your assertions, you respond with vague inanities. You are just a shallow man who pretends to be an elderly intellectual. Thanks again for proving PewResearch, Arjun, Sattar and a lot of other guys (most of them Pakis) true.

hahaha
The horror The horror
kaal has been called a liberal

#367
echoboom (yelling and screaming rabble rouser, anti-"ooons", maybe less than 30 years old?)
--------------------

aah ki keh ditta....ajj wichari chaachi echoboom di shaamat aaoo. baba sufnay ch manjhi hilaoo.
:) :)

Knowing somewhat where individual interactors are coming from, this is my synopsis:

dost_mittar (a hindu)

arjun2 (anti-Pakistan muslim hindu)

sattar2 (ahmedi)

tahmed32 (rational sunni muslim)

mohar11 (anti-Pakistan muslim hindu)

anil (liberal hindu)

zeemax (Pakistani muslim with tendency of waffling on many issues, having somewhat wahabhi tendency)

PM (liberal christian)

KaalChakra (liberal ????) what are you kaal?

ajeya (definitely anti-muslim)

Dash_Dot

harish_hyd (definitely anti-muslim)(twin of ajeya)

masanamuthu (confused sardarni)

cliftonbridge (liberal mohajir muslim, maybe from Karachi)

teshah (definitely hindu, with anti-stupidity from muslims)

philosopher (always uses circular logic)

Urstruly (our chowk resident mullah, an authentic muslim)

hamidm2 (very funny guy, on mission to reform muslims)- Good luck!!!!

subhashjoshi (anti-muslim hindu)

Tehsinabbasi (liberal muslim, always play devil's advocate)

HP (muslim from sindh, very rational and authentic)

echoboom (yelling and screaming rabble rouser, anti-"ooons", maybe less than 30 years old?)

tahmed32#357:

You have made your position quite clear, thank you.


sattar2#360:

I do not believe that tahmed is a fool or a hypocrite. I have no reason to think that he does not believe what he says or that he does not practice what he preaches. As rahul rightly points out, we are old friends chatting over a cyber coffee table who like to spar from time to time without any intention of hurting the other.

However, I might say that your posts do raise doubts about your being a Muslim and this has nothing to do with your interpretation of Khatam-ul-Nabiyat.;)

#352 Posted by mohar11 on July 25, 2007 11:12:24 am


In pakiland - Afgan prostitutes are dime a dozen...


The whole country of pakiland has been prostituted out by the paki army...does that count?

#360 Posted by sattar2 on July 25, 2007 3:39:54 pm


From there on he is stuck in denial,


tahmed is cleopatra: the queen of denial..

tahmed, you fool …

Posts I wrote are for everyone. You were blowing smoke with claims of rationality of your faith, and I called you on it. If you must, be upset with your messenger, his god, and the angel who talked to them. And please, no more lectures on Quran till you’ve read it at least once.

Note that you raised this issue by lecturing others on rationality of your faith. However, your assertion that “Quran treats Muhammad no differently” is obviously incorrect. Like I said, it is quite amusing to see a fool trying to rationalize his faith; thanks for the entertainment.

Now, like a typical hypocrite, you say “to you, your faith; to me, mine”. But all along you have criticized others for their faith, without any provocation. Do you see the irony?

And don’t worry about Ahmadi khalifa. Instead, you should be worried about Muhammad himself … who handed you the Quran … and who came up with verses saying that … Allah will double the reward for Muhammad’s wives if they are obedient to Muhammad (!)… that believers should marry widows, but Muhammad’s widows would be off-limits (!!)… that Allah approves if Muhammad wants to marry his adopted son’s divorced wife (!!!). And there's more. Jeeeeez man … how could you miss all this?

So take a dose of humility Sahib. Stop trying to validate your faith and stop telling everyone what is wrong with their faiths. You are a miserable, pathetic fool and an idiot with delusions of self-righteousness. Other than that, you might be an ok guy … (wide grin)