It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Teacher To Be Prosecuted For Calling Mohammed Child Molester

page: 9
33
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 12 2016 @ 03:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: ladyinwaiting

originally posted by: BrokedownChevy
a reply to: ladyinwaiting

Lol. Classic ATS response. No rebuttal. Nothing of substance. I have explained it to you and it is so clear. You're done. Stop being a child...bride.


I will always stand in opposition to child abuse. I am the one who tries very hard to put the broken pieces back together with these children. I have been with them in back of ambulances, in court, in group therapy, in individual therapy, and yes, I have sat in on their autopsies.

I will always stand in opposition to child abuse whether it is sexual, physical, emotional or mental. And I don't give a rat's ass who perpetrates it.

Count on it.


So your going to go back in time to stop people from having children with your 21st century mind set, or even better are you going to go fight the Vatican for protecting pedophiles, that's from the 20th and 21st century you wont need a time machine for that one.




posted on May, 12 2016 @ 04:29 PM
link   
a reply to: Shiloh7

Nobody is saying people should be practising this same custom in our current society. However it was the reality for everyone back then. So calling Muhammad names and leaving out the leaders of the Christian and Jewish traditions is hippocracy.



posted on May, 12 2016 @ 04:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: Joecanada11
a reply to: Shiloh7

Nobody is saying people should be practising this same custom in our current society. However it was the reality for everyone back then. So calling Muhammad names and leaving out the leaders of the Christian and Jewish traditions is hippocracy.


But, should the teacher in the OP be prosecuted for stating a fact. She didn't call him a SOB. That would be name-calling. She said he was a child molester, which is factually correct whether it was the practice to bang a nine year old or not back in those days. To prosecute this woman is absurd.



posted on May, 12 2016 @ 04:38 PM
link   
a reply to: Joecanada11




Nobody is saying people should be practising this same custom in our current society. However it was the reality for everyone back then. So calling Muhammad names and leaving out the leaders of the Christian and Jewish traditions is hippocracy (sic).


That's not hypocrisy. If she called Muhammad a child-molester then she herself engaged in child-molesting, then she would be a hypocrite. But no, not including other religions or prophets in a criticism of Muhammad is not hypocrisy.



posted on May, 12 2016 @ 05:01 PM
link   
a reply to: queenofswords

Then she should at least have been more truthful by admitting that pretty much every man back then was a child molester, including her own ancestors. But her goal wasn't to be truthful. Her goal was to demean the religion of Islam by demeaning its prophet. Intent is key here.



posted on May, 12 2016 @ 05:25 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

It's complete hipocracy to critisize a prophet of one religion of the same things all other prophets did. He and every other male of his time and for almost the entire history of mankind has had young brides of breeding age. It's only been in the last hundred years that the practice has been changed.



posted on May, 12 2016 @ 05:26 PM
link   
a reply to: queenofswords

I agree that prosecuting her is stupid. I have no disagreement on that part.



posted on May, 12 2016 @ 05:29 PM
link   
This is not even a news story in Austria but as usual ATS is blowing it out of proportion. There has been a complaint, so the district attorney is investigating. Do we already know where the complaint come from?

The (multiculutural) school commented by saying there is no place for such hate speeches like that, especially not from a teacher.


And as always, as long as there is crap in other yards, you don't have to deal with your own (right USA?
).



posted on May, 12 2016 @ 07:41 PM
link   
Not entirely sure discussing paedophilia in front of a class is appropriate for a teacher of middle school kids. It's not about whether it's true or not as the kids will be able to determine that for themselves when they're older, it's about what her function in society is and whether saying it does anything at all to help those kids become productive, well adjusted human beings. Pretty sure it's not part of the curriculum.



posted on May, 12 2016 @ 07:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: Danowski

And as always, as long as there is crap in other yards, you don't have to deal with your own (right USA?
).


We have Christian teachers that make negative remarks about Islam. They usually get fired. That's without a blasphemy law.



posted on May, 12 2016 @ 07:46 PM
link   

originally posted by: MagnaCarta2015
Not entirely sure discussing paedophilia in front of a class is appropriate for a teacher of middle school kids. It's not about whether it's true or not as the kids will be able to determine that for themselves when they're older, it's about what her function in society is and whether saying it does anything at all to help those kids become productive, well adjusted human beings. Pretty sure it's not part of the curriculum.



I completely agree. It's not her place to be discussing religion in the classroom or in any event to be expressing her personal opinions on the subject, unless it is a religious curriculum in a religious school.



posted on May, 12 2016 @ 08:00 PM
link   

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
a reply to: BO XIAN

I wonder if Jesus would call Muslims that today if he walked the Earth, or he'd try to befriend them and show them a better way?

Your example is not even possible. Jesus would have been bombed or beheaded before that would have ever happened. He would have been the #1 infidel.
edit on 5/12/2016 by whatnext21 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 12 2016 @ 09:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
Okie dokie.

I've already died before, so I already know what that's like.

EDIT: I'm not derailing anything, it's the Mudpit.

I saw a bunch of "Christians" not being very "Christ-like", so I decided to say something.



Lots of people keep saying that.

How do they know what Christ was like? They don't even believe in Him.

Hell, they can't even get Trump's words right from what he said on video last night.

You said you died? Did you remember anything about dying?

Did someone tell you that you died?



posted on May, 12 2016 @ 09:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: Vector99
a reply to: 5StarOracle

Oh, you mean morals. I don't need a book telling me some guy in the sky is watching me to be a good person. Whether you believe it or not, people aren't just wild crazy animals. We are conscious, intelligent beings.

What you mentioned being "godly" is nothing more than common decency.

Since this is a thread about the indecencies of biblical figures, would you like to explain and make excuses for the old testament?


Morals? We don't need no steenking morals.

What about the OT you need excuses for?

So, you can remember one of your lives as some chump war lord 6000 yrs ago or were you chopping out 2 ton blocks of limestone for beers?

Everything was cool, right? kumbaya, mmm gow wah!



posted on May, 12 2016 @ 09:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: Bobaganoosh
a reply to: dukeofjive696969

Possibly, but my great great grandad didn't amass an uncountable number of deranged followers. So what is your point?



Hahahaha!! Good one.

They have some real issues, too, til this day, about s....e...x...



posted on May, 12 2016 @ 09:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: kaylaluv
a reply to: Bobaganoosh

America had slaves. Slavery was considered acceptable at one time. Therefore, anyone who considers themselves an American patriot is obviously okay with slavery.


Slaves were legal until they were not.

Islam still has slaves.

America had the shortest bout of slavery for white people, btw white people stopped it and they weren't muslim or atheists.



posted on May, 12 2016 @ 09:42 PM
link   

originally posted by: burgerbuddy

America had the shortest bout of slavery for white people, btw white people stopped it and they weren't muslim or atheists.



Christians also justified slavery because of the Mark of Ham.



posted on May, 12 2016 @ 10:36 PM
link   

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: burgerbuddy

America had the shortest bout of slavery for white people, btw white people stopped it and they weren't muslim or atheists.



Christians also justified slavery because of the Mark of Ham.


Haha! you said ham, was he the earl of sandwich?

Slavery was all the rage back in the day, Annee, people gave themselves to it to clear debts also.

Still is for some peoples.



posted on May, 12 2016 @ 10:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: burgerbuddy

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: burgerbuddy

America had the shortest bout of slavery for white people, btw white people stopped it and they weren't muslim or atheists.



Christians also justified slavery because of the Mark of Ham.


Haha! you said ham, was he the earl of sandwich?

Slavery was all the rage back in the day, Annee, people gave themselves to it to clear debts also.

Still is for some peoples.



LOL, I like you funny.

Still, the Christians used their belief to justify it as their right.



posted on May, 12 2016 @ 10:51 PM
link   


Muhammad is the only man in history no one can criticize without dangerous repercussion


You forgot Jesus, MLK and Ronald Reagan.



new topics

top topics



 
33
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join