In the Name of Allah, the Most Merciful #988 Urstruly

Or are you saying that there is no moral dilemma for Muslims if Muhammad at 53 years of age wanted to have sex with a 6 year-old?

In the Name of Allah, the Most Merciful misc. by tahir

tahir,

Anger comes from fear. Look at Urstruly. He knows that. So he controls his anger so as not to betray his fear. Salim tries too, but is not always successful.

In the Name of Allah, the Most Merciful #988 Urstruly

[For arguments sake, from secular point of view, there cannot be a moral dilemma - labels are just that, labels. ]

Who's talking about a "dilemma"? (A Freudian slip, perhaps? :-))

And you have no problems assigning all kinds of "labels" to all kinds of people at other times.

So why can't you put the label now? I'll repeat the question for your convenience:

IF (for argument's sake) Mohammad had proposed marriage to Ayesha when she was 6 years old, would THAT make him a pedophile?

In the Name of Allah, the Most Merciful #980 Posted by Urstruly

Hey Urstruly,

IF (for argument's sake) Mohammad had proposed marriage to Ayesha when she was 6 years old, would THAT make him a pedophile?

Note that I said "for argument's sake".

In the Name of Allah, the Most Merciful #973 Salim_Chauhan

[I could also ask you whether you had stopped beating your wife.]

Why don't you ask me that, and see what I say in response?

[Your question is as stupid as that age-old trick. If you were seriously interested in the reasons and justifications for the various marriages of the Holy Prophet (PBUH) and his companions, I would gladly indulge your quest.]

Forget about my sinister motivations. Just take the question as an objective question.

See Salim, there IS a reason you guys cannot face this question (and many others). It is because ONCE you address this question, you have to start thinking about the POSSIBILITY that he was a pedophile, and therefore the POSSIBILITY that he was just another lowly con-man who is of a very bad character, and the POSSIBILITY that your loyal club membership is not going to produce the membership benefits that you have been hoping for all your life.

[The marriages included Mohammed's (PBUH) life-long partner, a widow who was 15 years older than he. Also, he married a black woman, an Egyption Copt, and a daughter of Hazrat Omar (RA). He gave the hands of two daughters to Hazrat Othman (RA) and one to Imam Ali (RA). In the tribal Arabia of those days, it was customary to marry to cement alliances.]

And he married his daughter-in-law Zainab who he happened to see naked, and his wives threatened to go public when they caught him spending too much time raping the newly acquired white Egyptian slave.

[Yes, he married Hazrat Ayesha (RA), the young daughter of Hazrat Abu Bakr (RA). Thanks to the senility of certain sources, who wrote several generations after the events, there is considerable confusion about her age at the time of her marriage and consummation of that marriage. The most reliable version puts that age between 16 and 18.]

Heh heh. Okay. Now IF (for argument's sake) it so happened that he had lustful feelings for Ayesha when she was 6 (or younger - because he proposed marriage when she was 6 - he must have seen her before too) and he was a man of 55 with grey pubic hair, THEN what?

[If you are attempting to suggest that, Nauzbillah, our Holy Prophet (PBUH) was a pedophile, Toba Toba, then you must know that pedophilia is manifested as a recurring problem and never a single faux pas.]

Not necessarily. He must have had the urge all along, and only satisfied it when he was powerful enough to do it without people rebelling against him. End of the day, he had to maintain the loyalty of his subjects as well.

[Shame on you. Do you have the same inquisitive concern about all the other religious leaders in history? What have you researched about Jesus Christ? about Brigham Young? About the Medicis? ]

Jesus Christ was a non-violent and honorable man. But that is besides the point. Let's not lose focus here. :-)

My Most Memorable Journey #30 Ranjit (Got into IIT without Quota)

[Mohar says - "Leave pakis alone"

Yaar, if you want to leave them alone, why do u come to chowk every day and take pangas with them? Its the same BS that paki uber-nationalists put out that they want to move away from India, even as they go home and watch bollywood movies and listen to himesh reshmaiyaa.

If u went to chinese and iranian web sites as well, then I can buy your argument....but if u only go to paki sites, you are not exactly taking the lead to "leave them alone".... ]

I think all Indian interactors would do well to listen to what Ranjit has to say. To begin with, he did not get into IIT on a quota. So don't even bring that up. He got in fair and square. This proves that what he is saying is right. If you don't agree with him, it is probably because you yourself did not get in, and even if you did, you got in on a quota, and therefore he is right and you are wrong.

And don't bring up caste. He has already said that he did NOT get in on a SC/ST quota. So don't even try!

In the Name of Allah, the Most Merciful #965 Urstruly

[Name one person from this day and age of reality TV and paparazzi whose life has been documented so closely as that of prophet Mohammad (pbuh). Now take your mind to centuries ago and think whether it was possible then? Can't you see that Allah made it possible through Prophet Mohammad's (companions and wives).Today we know extremely minute details about the life of Holy Prophet because these people made effort to document it. Since life of prophet Mohammad (pbuh) is the beacon for the rest of humanity, which guides humanity how to be successful in every aspect in this life and beyond, Allah made arrangements through Ayesha (RA) and other companions to document the very private life of Prophet so that the people who would come later would understand his personality with ease.. It is because of Ayesh (RA) and the thousands of hadiths that she narrated that we come up with a complete picture of a human being of which a large part of humanity even today is in awe. This is the power of Divine mandate. Our mother Ayesha (RA) later turned out to be one of the greatest scholars in history of Islam. How can you deny this evidence that their marriage was a Divine mandate. Don't you see that very "historical evidence" that you use to berate us was provided by none other but Ayesha (ra) herself and protected and propagated by none other but us. Could you ever know about Ayesha (ra) had she not documented it for us?Do you have an evidence of your own?

So please calm down. Don't you see that there is a Divine mandate at work here again, otherwise why would you come here at Chowk and inquire about a person who passed away 15 centuries ago.]

Urstruly,

I wish you could see how idiotic this sounds from outside the padded cell.

You have provided "proof" that he is a messenger of god because his life is the "most documented" therefore there is a divine purpose. Therefore he was the messenger, and therefore nothing else matters.

You see, for rational people, the reasoning is the OTHER way round. He is a pedophile, a mass murderer and a serial killer. Therefore one should not listen to ANYTHING that comes out of his mouth. Especially cock-and-bull stories about meeting a winged creature in a cave. Case closed.


[Don't you understand that God is in fact pleased with you? He has brought you closer to the people who can answer your queries. Please do not waste this extraordinary opportunity wallowing in self inflicted hatred.]

When I see a pedophile, I call him a pedophile. I don't see that as an opportunity.

[Open up your mind and recognize your Creator who shows great mercy to you.]

You see, Urstruly, I don't need the creator's or anyone's "mercy". This is because I an not a "faithful" belonging to the simplistic and childish Abrahamic traditions. I identify with the philosophy that is inherent in our Sanatana Dharma - that says "Tat twam asi" or "You are him". I AM a manifestation of that trandescent reality, also known as Brahman. As is everything else. We Hindus are not "afraid", and therefore do not need "mercy".

It's as simple as that.

In the Name of Allah, the Most Merciful #963 Salim_Chauhan

[You are asking me as if I was there. Let me tell you that I was not there and neither were you. ]

Heh heh. No, I am NOT asking you that (and you know it too). I am NOT asking you whether IN FACT it happened.

I am asking you that IF it had indeed happened (if we assume that iit had happened, just for argument's sake), THEN would you consider him a pervert?

You are just delaying the inevitable. Come on now. Let's have the answer.

:-)

In the Name of Allah, the Most Merciful It's interesting, isn't it, how a small simple yes or no question can take people so long to answer?

: )

In the Name of Allah, the Most Merciful #95 Salim_Chauhan

[These "sources" of Hadiths were born generations after the events that they so "accurately" describe. So and so told so and so who told so and so that so and so did this to so and so. No wonder, some very learned people in Turkey are going to heave a lot of this unsubstantiated nonsense into the trash bin.]


To everyone who is watching this debate: THIS is how you deal with people who try to exonerate the guilty by creating doubts about the details of the crime:

Hey Salim,

One question. IF IT WAS TRUE that Mohammed had expressed a desire to marry Ayesha when she was 6, and ultimately married her when she was 9, would you THEN consider him to be a lowlife?

Please note that I am not saying here if it was ACTUALLY TRUE OR NOT. Just tell me - IF IT WAS TRUE - then would you consider him to be a lowlife and a pervert?

(Just don't tell me that you don't discuss hypotheticals. Because over the years, you have discussed lots of hypothetical questions.)

Can we get an answer to this?

:-)

(that smiley means that I am asking nicely)

In the Name of Allah, the Most Merciful #882 tahir

[What was a Wall Street man upto, running after the alleged top terrorists?]

If you understood that, you would not be a Muslim.

In the Name of Allah, the Most Merciful misc by dost_mittar

Dost-Mittar,

I think you'd do well not to discuss "universal human values" with "humans" like zeemax and urstruly. The odious nature of these individuals' beliefs indicates that "human values" depends on which human you are talking about. I still remember once when urstruly was suggesting that the Afghani women who were prostituting themselves at the risk of losing their lives, just to feed their starving kids, were doing so as an option, and deserved a dog's death. And zeemax has proved time and again why people like him should be put in forced labor camps with very high walls.

And on the discussion of the merits and demerits of Hinduism's "human sacrifices" and "sati" vs. Islam's perversions. You could always say that because Hindus are not trying to convert anyone, so if Hindus are sacrificing other hindus on the alter, or forcing their women to perform Sati, it is a self-contained problem, and not affecting anyone else. Islam, on the other hand HAS TO FACE public criticism - if you are trying to sell your Mutual Fund to the public and claiming it is the best prescription for anybody's financial health, then guess what, the general public has every right to dissect your Mutual Fund very publicly. So it is with Islam, which has been hawking its wares everywhere since it's inception.

And as far as tahmed is concerned, he does have many of the right values in mind, and he is always trying to "reconcile" what he knows to be the right human values with what is written in the good book. He is eternally trying to fit a square peg in a round hole, and his tortured arguments trying to justify this or that vile statement in the "holy" book, or this or that monstrous deed by mo is both funny and sad to watch, at the same time.

But unfortunately, this is what makes tahmed much more dangerous than urstruly or zeemax. While in any civilized society, if urstruly and zeemax make their views known publicly, they would get themselves locked away promptly, tahmed would go unnoticed. Because it is people like him, and not Osama Bin Laden, that are more insidious - the veil of deception (whether it is due to calculation or crass idiocy as in the case of Tahmed) protects the cult of Islam, and enables it to thrive and prosper and extend its tentacles far and wide inside an unsuspecting civilized society. Unfortunately there are too many Daniel Pearls in this world, and while these liberals are the first ones to be executed or imprisoned in any Islamic society, in a democratic society their good-intentioned idealism is what enables the cult of mohammed to prosper and keep laying it's poison eggs.

In the Name of Allah, the Most Merciful #710 izuber

[You are quite an intellect when it comes to sweeping your dust under the rug and to capitalize on other's filth. ]

See izuber,

You are not very intelligent. But that's not your fault. Here's an opportunity for you to realize how stupid you are. Once you have realized it, begin to talk less and listen more. Maybe you can still become less of a pest.

Okay. See, izuber, I don't give a flying fcuk how Muslims treat their women. I empathize with individuals who are suffering, but for the community as a whole, I could care less. It is the price Muslims pay for not having the strength to break through the shackles of Islam. But that is their problem. I did not bring up this topic. Ms. Azra Rashid did. I did not even participate in it once she had brought up the topic. I ONLY started interacting when some idiot started painting it as a India-Pakistan (i.e. Subcontinental) problem. So when India, and us Hindus, got dragged into it, that's when I started interacting on this particular board.

You are the prototypical tahmed-clone. With a deeply tribal mindset and therefore ideal Islamic material. So what I wrote might not make sense. But if you want to improve, read this over and over until you understand. Only then you'll be able to grasp the depth of your stupidity. And if you truly realize that, there might still be hope for you.

In the Name of Allah, the Most Merciful #702 bubba

[You are wrong because it violates the basis of human rights as defined by the UN. Why can't you accept this fact that Hinduism, as practiced today in its current form, is a violation of human rights? ]

It is. But what does that have to do with the question of whether Islamic values lead to "Honor" killings in Islamic societies?

In the Name of Allah, the Most Merciful #696 Salim_Chauhan

[It becomes MY business when a fellow human being is denied basic rights such as drinking water, walking on the sidewalk, or using public facilities. ]

I think you Muslims have enough social problems to keep you guys busy. If any "human being" is being mercilessly denied basic rights like that where you live (you must be living in some interior village in Bihar), then report it to some NGO, if you don't trust a Hindu-majority government.

[If Hinduism doesn't allow anything, how come Hindus enforce the caste system with ruthless force, sometimes death of the untouchables? And, worst of all, why do the untouchables accept their horrid treatment at the hands of the caste Hindus? Even having the shadow of a dalit is concerned impure for the "MY SHIT DOESN'T STINK, I AM A BRAHMIN" upper caste.]

I think you have mistaken this forum for Dalistan.org.

In the Name of Allah, the Most Merciful My lack of time to make long posts should not be optimistically interpreted as my lack of logical answers.

#679 Salim_Chauhan

[I have nothing against a person voluntarily joining another organization and gaining acceptance.]

Yes, maybe you don't, but a lot of Muslims with knives and bombs do. Because it is CLEARY against Islamic law, which EXPLICITLY says that a Hindu woman MUST "convert" to Islam. If that does not happen, and the Muslim man "converts" instead, the couple are doomed to lead a life full of risks. So, for the sake of peace, the woman converts. This happens
in the vast majority of cases.


[Hinduism, with its bias based on birth, caste, and color, cannot make the same claim. ]

Hindu's caste system has been used to justify everything from Murder, Rape, looting Hindu temples to imposing the jizya and forced conversions. Hindu's "bias on birth, caste and color" are none of anybody's business other than Hindus themselves, because it does not affect anybody else.

Hinduism doesn't allow or disallow anything. Being a "Hindu" is like being an "American" or a "Chinese" - if you feel that you can culturally identify with Hindu culture, then you are a Hindu. Hindus mostly don't care whether you call yourself "Hindu" or not.