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.

 

Muhamed was a child molester.

page: 25
51
<< 22  23  24    26 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 16 2016 @ 10:44 PM
link   

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
I think there are some acts that are immoral by human standards..

Again, what makes them so? I am not asking you for a divine document proving that some act is unequivocally considered evil, I am just asking for you to show valid reasoning to support your arguments.


None of the "victimless crimes" or morality police issues of course, just the big stuff..


Cold blooded murder, slavery, rape and childmolestion off the top of my head fit the bill.

See how you classify those behaviours as "the big stuff"? You have obviously been conditioned (as most of us living today have) to view those acts as fitting the bill of the worst crimes imaginable.


I think those things could safely be considered "evil"...and without needing a diety to tell us that.

But why do you maintain such thoughts, is what I am getting at.




posted on May, 16 2016 @ 10:48 PM
link   
a reply to: JoshuaCox

" over all good vs evil of adults marrying children after their first period.."

then Love must have a context in this debate

or you are just debating sex not marriage



posted on May, 16 2016 @ 10:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: Dark Ghost

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
Their entire argument is based on 2 totally flawed points..

1: that the law of the land is the deciding factor of good or evil.

Maybe not the law itself, but certainly the type of people that make up the state where the laws are made determine what is good or evil. You know that sick feeling you get in your stomach when you consider child rapists? Well, that reaction is the result of conditioning by the society you were brought up in which determined sex with minors as abhorrent. If you think I am wrong, then tell me: if you go back to your 5 year old self and were asked "what are your views on adults having sex with children?" would your reaction then be the same as it is now?


2: that some scientific text book defines an adult as "some one who has reached puberty."

It's tricky to define when adulthood has set in. In most Western countries, the age of consent is between 16-21, with 18 being about the median. Now, such a calculation is not based purely on biological processes (when puberty is finished and adolescence begins) but rather social determinations such as the average life span.

If the average life span today was 20 years old (just imagine for arguments sake), do you think this would alter the determined age of consent compared to today's classification?


Well obviously laws have constantly been wrong, or we wouldn't have to change them...

I agree that laws ought to be revised from time to time as they need to adapt with the times.


I'm not so sure the abhorrence to the big crimes I listed is only because of our society.

Maybe so, but there are a lot of deep seeded and maybe genetic blocks to , for example taking a human life. There are a lot of interesting war stats that lead to the conclusion very few humans are wired to kill other humans.

The average life span thing is a farce, or misunderstood.... It wasn't that most people died between 20 and 30. It was that the infant mortality rate was soooo high. It sckewed the results..if you lived to adult hood , you would prob live till 60. It's just that all the one year olds that died pulled down the average.

So that's not a valid counter point, because the main increase in death was well before child bearing years.

I would also say that biologically a "just started female" is not ready to procreate. Look at the increase in complications that come from it. Hell, dogs you breed on their first heat rarely do well. Your supposed to wait until their third..which in dog years would be late teens..

So the biological excuse is out the window..

That only leaves the societal aspect, and the laws we have to constantly rewrite and our history of state sponsored atrocieties, mean that's not a real good counter point either.



posted on May, 16 2016 @ 11:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: kibric
a reply to: JoshuaCox

" over all good vs evil of adults marrying children after their first period.."

then Love must have a context in this debate

or you are just debating sex not marriage


I don't think a 12 year old can consent and be in adult love.....

Not every single marriage was some old banker and a 12 year old.. Some were both kids or a 16 and a 20 year old...

But in the hypothetical worst case scenerio (or I guess best case too) is some crusty old man( or some attractive young 35 year old who really does love the 12 year old betrothed (best case scenerio), marries
A 12 year old (hypothetical median age for first period) and has sex with her, obviously.

Is it child molestation if it is legal in the country of origin?

Or is an adult having sex with a 12 year old rape and/or child molestation in any age?

Basically... I think that's a fair summary, or at least how I see the brass tax of it all.



posted on May, 16 2016 @ 11:07 PM
link   
a reply to: JoshuaCox

my only point is that Romantic Love has a context in this debate

if you are covering all factors of Mohammeds marriage
edit on 16-5-2016 by kibric because: no reason



posted on May, 17 2016 @ 02:32 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on May, 17 2016 @ 05:38 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on May, 17 2016 @ 08:44 AM
link   
Mind you, I am a firm believer in God if not religion ... faith and religion are two entirely different concepts though most people do not bother to differentiate between the twain ... however ...

There is ample evidence, most among them the recorded social "norms" of the times and the sociological evidence of that period in our history, that the mother of Jesus, Mary, was only about eleven or maybe twelve when betrothed to Joseph and was likely only twelve to thirteen when she gave birth to the Christ. As late as the eighteen hundreds in the USA, a girl was considered an undesirable old maid if she had reached the age of sixteen without being wed off and marriages were common at thirteen and fourteen. While I am not a Muslim, I have studied it to a degree ... (how can you know anything unless you study it from all sides with an open mind?) and granted, nine is probably not pubescent, but it has been common practice to wed girls at a pre-pubescent age and wait until they are "fertile" before any physical insertion ... before a complete consummation of the relationship. I have very many issues with Islam most especially that it is not merely a religion, but an empirical theocratic movement. However, I do not hear anyone condemning the American Cowboy that often wed girls as young as 12 or 13 or pointing out that in the times of Jesus, such practices were just as common.

a reply to: Thetan


edit on 17 5 2016 by TinFoilSuit because: Because I needed "as" not "we" where I edited.



posted on May, 17 2016 @ 09:49 AM
link   
a reply to: JoshuaCox

I honestly dont see where in the OT it says anything about specific ages of brides, including Mary in the NT.

If you can cite an underage marriage in the OT, please do. Actual scripture, as I presented actual scripture from Hadiths supporting my argument.

Its not cherry picking Im talking about the acts of ONE man, and the effects of it in his legacy. I'm not defending the OT or New, I'm deflecting the strawman arguments about Christianity put up in response to my posts. I never said "its bad because Jesus is the best!" so why hit me up with that?

Why not hit up Judaism, Buddhism, Zoroastrianism, etc? Again, not points Im defending.



posted on May, 17 2016 @ 09:53 AM
link   
a reply to: kibric

Thats a slippery slope point to make. I dare say most people in the critically thinking world would agree there is no such thing as a real Romance in the relationships of pre-teens; especially when its with an adult partner in an arranged marriage.



posted on May, 17 2016 @ 10:05 AM
link   
Not to be merely a contrarian but, how would you define "real romance" in an adult relationship? Would it not be a combination of a shared enjoyment of certain activities? Maybe interspersed with love for the same foods? Romance is a very intangible and ambiguous act even among adults. Why would such a loosely defined concept be so much different for an "adult" than it would for a tween or a teen?

a reply to: Butterfinger

PS - With a pre-teen I can definitely see your point as they would not be capable of understanding the full ramifications of a physical relationship yet ... but I am curious about the rest.

edit on 17 5 2016 by TinFoilSuit because: Cuz I needed to clarify the 'lectrolytes an stuffs



posted on May, 17 2016 @ 10:13 AM
link   
a reply to: TinFoilSuit

In my opinion, the difference is that the common tastes as you mentioned would only mean freindship between an underage & adult pair.

Between 2 adults its the same.

The difference here is that it may provide fertile ground for love to grow and blossom. This "germination" of love must not be allowed to happen between an adult and an underage person.

Its up to the Adult to be an adult and stop the progression of lustful feelings between them.

The relationship simply cannot be allowed to take place, I think most people believe that... I hope!



posted on May, 17 2016 @ 10:19 AM
link   
a reply to: Butterfinger

" This "germination" of love must not be allowed to happen between an adult and an underage person. "

Love does not always mean sex

Mohammed might of truly Loved his wife
he himself might of been torn up by this falling in Love with a child

yes sleeping with a child is immoral

but before we jump too hate
we must consider all factors
or it is not a fair debate



posted on May, 17 2016 @ 10:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: Dark Ghost

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
I think there are some acts that are immoral by human standards..

Again, what makes them so? I am not asking you for a divine document proving that some act is unequivocally considered evil, I am just asking for you to show valid reasoning to support your arguments.


None of the "victimless crimes" or morality police issues of course, just the big stuff..


Cold blooded murder, slavery, rape and childmolestion off the top of my head fit the bill.

See how you classify those behaviours as "the big stuff"? You have obviously been conditioned (as most of us living today have) to view those acts as fitting the bill of the worst crimes imaginable.


I think those things could safely be considered "evil"...and without needing a diety to tell us that.

But why do you maintain such thoughts, is what I am getting at.


I think all of those things have an undeniable net negative gain on society.


Murder obviously causes conflict and the end of a potential genetic line. Causing family members and friends to seek vengence, causing more murder and a vicious cycle...

Rape/child molestation has an undeniable negative physical and mental component. Often causing injuries and mental breaks, as well as all the previously mentioned conflict by vengence seeking families.

The horrors of slavery are extremely appearent, usually including rape childmolestation and murder, and all negative results that come from those things.

Since the dawn of human history, such things have been appearent, it is just our inherent tribalism caused us to not veiw other tribes as human. So where it was a crime to enslave, rape or murder your own tribe, that did not apply to other tribes..

Well since technology has made all of humanity one tribe, now we apply that same logic to everyone.


It's fair to say our base nonenviormental humanity is a mystery. We can't raise children in total isolation, to complete the experiments required to see what is genetic memory and what is learned...but the that works both ways...

I think the big few things I listed have been with us since the dawn of civilization.



posted on May, 17 2016 @ 10:55 AM
link   

originally posted by: TinFoilSuit
Not to be merely a contrarian but, how would you define "real romance" in an adult relationship? Would it not be a combination of a shared enjoyment of certain activities? Maybe interspersed with love for the same foods? Romance is a very intangible and ambiguous act even among adults. Why would such a loosely defined concept be so much different for an "adult" than it would for a tween or a teen?

a reply to: Butterfinger

PS - With a pre-teen I can definitely see your point as they would not be capable of understanding the full ramifications of a physical relationship yet ... but I am curious about the rest.


I don't think there is much use in debating the issue when concerning people above the age of 14 and below the age of 11.

I think all of us agree on those things, it's the ages in the middle that are debatable.

Unless someone bases it soley on if a girl has flowered, that can be far younger...

So the question is can a 12 or 13 year old understand the concept of adult love and marriage?



posted on May, 17 2016 @ 11:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: Butterfinger
a reply to: JoshuaCox

I honestly dont see where in the OT it says anything about specific ages of brides, including Mary in the NT.

If you can cite an underage marriage in the OT, please do. Actual scripture, as I presented actual scripture from Hadiths supporting my argument.

Its not cherry picking Im talking about the acts of ONE man, and the effects of it in his legacy. I'm not defending the OT or New, I'm deflecting the strawman arguments about Christianity put up in response to my posts. I never said "its bad because Jesus is the best!" so why hit me up with that?

Why not hit up Judaism, Buddhism, Zoroastrianism, etc? Again, not points Im defending.




In the book of Numbers (31:18) God’s servant commands the Israelites to kill all of the used Midianite women who have been captured in war, and all of the boy children, but to keep all of the virgin girls for themselves. The Law of Moses spells out a purification ritual to prepare a captive virgin for life as a concubine. It requires her owner to shave her head and trim her nails and give her a month to mourn her parents before the first sex act (Deuteronomy 21:10-14). A Hebrew girl who is raped can be sold to her rapist for 50 shekels, or about $580 (Deuteronomy 22:28-29). He must then keep her as one of his wives for as long as she lives.



Abraham is married to his half-sister Sarah, but the two are childless for the first 75 years or so of their marriage. Frustrated, Sarah finally says, “The LORD has kept me from having children. Go, sleep with my slave; perhaps I can build a family through her.” Her slave, Hagar, becomes pregnant, and then later Sarah does too and the story gets complicated (Genesis 16). But that doesn’t stop Abraham’s grandson Jacob from participating in a competition, in which his two wives repeatedly send in their slaves to get pregnant by him, each trying to get more sons than the other (Genesis 30:1-22).



There are dozens of references validating both rape and slavery. It was a different time, so everyone else was doing it too. So I'm not pointing fingers soley at the bible. There is plenty of blame to go around.



posted on May, 17 2016 @ 11:13 AM
link   

originally posted by: kibric
a reply to: JoshuaCox

" over all good vs evil of adults marrying children after their first period.."

then Love must have a context in this debate

or you are just debating sex not marriage


I'm sure most child molestors "feel" as if they love their victims.



posted on May, 17 2016 @ 11:16 AM
link   
a reply to: JoshuaCox

a fair debate considers all factors



posted on May, 17 2016 @ 11:22 AM
link   
a reply to: Butterfinger

I grew up with Christianity, so it is my "baseline" for religion and the one I know the most about. Growing up in Mississippi provides quite a bit of biblical knowledge...or at least interpretation.


I also really hate hypocracy and propaganda, and I consider attacking Islam, when the biblical heroes did the exact same..maybe not Jesus himself, but all the rest of them did.

That said modern Christianity is more of a social club that cherry picks out all the good parts and discards or ignores the bad. Which I am all for! IMHO that's the best way you can handle it.

If someone is attacking Wahabism, then you won't get any argument from me, that's the Islamic sect that has caused all the problems... Most Muslims take the same social club, cherry picking route modern Christians take.

But blasting Mohammad for crimes commited by every Christian hero, except Jesus, as proof of Islam being an evil religion, is just nonsensical.



posted on May, 17 2016 @ 11:23 AM
link   

originally posted by: JoshuaCox


In the book of Numbers (31:18) God’s servant commands the Israelites to kill all of the used Midianite women who have been captured in war, and all of the boy children, but to keep all of the virgin girls for themselves. The Law of Moses spells out a purification ritual to prepare a captive virgin for life as a concubine. It requires her owner to shave her head and trim her nails and give her a month to mourn her parents before the first sex act (Deuteronomy 21:10-14). A Hebrew girl who is raped can be sold to her rapist for 50 shekels, or about $580 (Deuteronomy 22:28-29). He must then keep her as one of his wives for as long as she lives.



Abraham is married to his half-sister Sarah, but the two are childless for the first 75 years or so of their marriage. Frustrated, Sarah finally says, “The LORD has kept me from having children. Go, sleep with my slave; perhaps I can build a family through her.” Her slave, Hagar, becomes pregnant, and then later Sarah does too and the story gets complicated (Genesis 16). But that doesn’t stop Abraham’s grandson Jacob from participating in a competition, in which his two wives repeatedly send in their slaves to get pregnant by him, each trying to get more sons than the other (Genesis 30:1-22).



There are dozens of references validating both rape and slavery. It was a different time, so everyone else was doing it too. So I'm not pointing fingers soley at the bible. There is plenty of blame to go around.




I see where youre going, but none of those verses indicate the age of the girls.




Deuteronomy 21:10-14 Expanded Bible (EXB) 10 When you go to war against your enemies, the Lord will •help you defeat them [give them into your hands] so you will take them captive. 11 If you see a beautiful woman among the captives and are attracted to [desire; fall in love with] her, you may take her as your wife. 12 Bring her into your home, where she must shave her head and cut her nails 13 and change the clothes she was wearing when you captured her. After she has lived in your house and cried for her •parents [L father and her mother] for a month, you may marry her. You will be her husband, and she will be your wife. 14 But if you are not pleased with her, you must let her go anywhere she wants. You must not sell her for money or make her a slave, because you have taken away her honor [humiliated; exploited her].


In context.

You have to take them as your wife, not use them and sell them.

Nowhere in this passage says that anyone had sex with them while they were still children.

What we are missing is the scripture that defines Legal Jewish age for marriage.

You are inferring that the marriages took place immediately after conquest, if at all. That stance is not supported by the scriptures you are using.



new topics




 
51
<< 22  23  24    26 >>

log in

join