Saudi Court Approves Pedophilia

Originally posted by iwishicould
reply to post by The All Seeing I

 

you cant go into some other people land and force them to live by our laws...

Right and wrong;

For bad and good... we have proven that you can make certain topics a thought-crime/taboo. Prime example would be the ADL & AIPAC scaring every politician silent on Israel's human rights record. In many countries to question, investigate or challenge the official holocaust story is a punishable crime. In many countries the production, sales, distribution and possession of child pornography is a punishable crime. At the same time, keep in mind that our government, nonprofits & for-profits spend billions if not trillions a year on marketing/advertising/PR campaigns to push their products/services/agenda all without physically entering people's homes or forcing these values down anyone's throat. If we can be so successful at brainwashing and changing minds through these means... what says we can't do the same overseas. Put or brightest minds in this arena on how to promote universal values throughout the globe. The Peace Corps and Christian Missionaries in third world countries have found a successful angle/route in changing minds/values to our preference.

We have managed to hard sell so many nonsensical lies domestically and abroad on our ventures in the middle east. Promoting women's and children's rights on the other hand is a soft sell and intuitively makes sense. This is an info-war that we have lost by default because we just didn't care to show up. Since religion is so key to this issue with child brides being classified as a commodity, the portion of the value system that claims authority of this matter needs to be changed... and as we well know, being the guinea pigs and unaware participants of our own capitalist propaganda machine, we are without a doubt the craftiest at changing minds with or without pen or sword.

[edit on 15-4-2009 by The All Seeing I]

Originally posted by grover
reply to post by Cythraul

 

The ignorance of your post is not much different in the ignorance you deplore in Islam.

Sorry for the late reply grover. You may call me ignorant if you like, but I don't like Islam. I'm not going to apologise for that and I've put many years of thought and learning into my conclusion.

I agree that marriage to young women was more common worldwide a thousand years ago. But this isn't a thousand years ago and the Qur'an still documents paedophilia as part of Islam and clearly, many Muslims still take advantage of that particular aspect. My point was that the act of paedophilia in question is not merely Saudi backwardism - unrelated to the teachings of Islam. It is Saudi backwardism, given the idea by Islamic backwardism.

Islam no doubt has some admirable qualities and has given the world some nice art and inventions. However, the negativity it shares with the world outweighs this.

reply to post by Ownification


So, if I understand you correctly, you disregard the Hadith?

The Hadith is right up there with the Qur'an in the rules and laws and practices of Islam.

You just dismissed the Hadith?

I note a quote from some source, but that means squat.

I could quote an Islamic apologist group, and it would have no truth, no basis in fact, and therefore, no meaning.

The reason a lot of Muslims don't like outsiders reading the Hadith, is because it is a record of the words and deeds of Muhammed. It shows Islam and the prophet of Islam for what he was.

And I don't blame Muslims. I wouldn't want outsiders to read the life and times of Muhammed, by those who were there with him either.

Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by Ownification

 

We have already been through this propaganda nonsense that you are pushing. What U.S. rape statistics show is that we are already doing more in the U.S. to combat rape than the rest of the world, by making sure these incidents are getting reported, and the violators prosecuted. In places like Saudi Arabia and many Muslim nations, it is obvious that rape is covered up and hidden, when not actively engaging in down right intimidation against women who dare to speak up against crimes committed against them. When you physically beat a woman for daring to report a rape, or course you are going to have very few rapes reported.

This type of propaganda nonsense you put forth only serves to make matters worse. Who do you think you are fooling.

Firstly I was talking about morals which you were refering to. Secondly nope I disagree about your proclamation that providing you with statestics is propaganda because it is taken out of context. I wasn't just talking about rape in my reply if you re-read it please it would help you explain. I was talking about all crimes, yes rape is something which is in your advantage that is the only reason why you mentioned it in your reply and completely forgetting about all the other crimes which are reported in similar standards as west.

Rape is a hard case to solve and it has been proven hence date rape. That is the reason why you want to stick with rape excluding other hurendouse crimes which are commited in western societies.

When you claim that somehow I'm using propaganda, you yourself sir should re-read your own post.

Originally posted by dooper
reply to post by Ownification

 

So, if I understand you correctly, you disregard the Hadith?

The Hadith is right up there with the Qur'an in the rules and laws and practices of Islam.

You just dismissed the Hadith?

I note a quote from some source, but that means squat.

I could quote an Islamic apologist group, and it would have no truth, no basis in fact, and therefore, no meaning.

The reason a lot of Muslims don't like outsiders reading the Hadith, is because it is a record of the words and deeds of Muhammed. It shows Islam and the prophet of Islam for what he was.

And I don't blame Muslims. I wouldn't want outsiders to read the life and times of Muhammed, by those who were there with him either.

No sir you are assuming which you shouldn't do in a debate. You assuming that I'm disregarding Hadith when you yourself have no idea how Hadiths are collected and how the credibility of a Hadith is determined. If you understand that then you would know what I'm talking about. As I said in my post before, I will repeat myself: The quote where Aisha states she was 9 years old is only narrated by one person. Get it? If one person narrates a Hadith it means it is not credible at all. The more narrators, the more credible a Hadith is.

Since there is only one narrator it is more wise to examine historicall evidence, so be wise and use your head in your next reply.

reply to post by Ownification


When you give people liberty, combined with high immigration, you get high crime rates. We still consider them to be crimes, and we punish people who commit these crimes, and that is all the difference in the world. In the Muslim world, it seems that crimes are overlooked in the name of religion. That is not acceptable.

Being that so many people choose to live in our country, often making great sacrifices just to come and live in our country, it is easy to see that people are willing to endure the abuse of liberty over the loss of liberty. This certainly doesn't translate into it being acceptable to overlook crimes in the name of humanity, as you seem to imply.

reply to post by Ownification


Actually the only thing that you said about morals was that you thought he was stupid to compare western morals with child molesters, rapists, murderers, and the men that marry small children.

Then you went on to tell him to check out some statistics for child molesting, rape, murder, and abuse, which you failed to provide.

You did not give the rape statistics you gave the number of rapes in the US from 2002, which are numbers out of context, not statistics. If you were talking about all crimes then you should have stated that, and provided the statistics for the crimes that you were trying to compare.

Show evidence of a court in the western societies that approves a marriage between an 8 year old girl and a 47 year old man, a court that allows a father to use his 8 year old child as a means to pay off a debt, in essence selling his 8 year old daughter as a sex slave.

When you have that evidence then by all means feel free to point out all the horrendous crimes that are commited in western societies, because right now i can't think of anythng more horrendous than what was allowed to be done to this little girl.

Hmmm this sounds eerily familiar...

Polygamy and Mormonism are inseparably entwined. One of the most offensive aspects of Mormon-based polygamy is the rampant practice of taking underage girls as polygamous wives. This is precisely what Brian David Mitchell did when he abducted Elizabeth Smart. In the western United States, there are at least 30,000 people involved in the practice of Mormon-based polygamy. In these polygamous groups, the compulsion for underage girls to marry polygamists--usually men much older than themselves--is a part of everyday life. In these communities, girls as young as 12 or 13 are often married off to priesthood leaders. The most powerful and influential of these priesthood holders have first pick of the girls. Parents of the young girls submit their daughters willingly into these unions with the hope of being blessed by God in their afterlife.

One asks, where did this practice come from? Why do these offenders take such young girls as wives? What does Mormon doctrine have to do with this?

These are indeed puzzling questions, but the answers are simple. The founder of Mormonism, Joseph Smith Jr. set the precedent for this behavior.

Smith married several underage girls himself. The most notorious example of this is in the case of Helen Mar Kimball. Young Helen married Smith in May, 1843. She was 14 years old; the same age as Elizabeth Smart was at the time of her abduction. Helen’s father, Heber Chase Kimball gave his daughter to Smith as a token of his unquestioning devotion. In return, Smith promised that this union would seal up the salvation of the Kimball family. Smith didn’t use a knife to coerce this young girl, he used the weapon he was most adept at using, psychological manipulation.

source: www.exmormon.org...

Does anyone recall Warren Jeffs and Juby Jessop?
(Help the Child Brides .Com)

reply to post by Ownification


Gee. So if only one person relates a narrative, then it's to be discarded.

There goes the Qur'an. Right down the toilet.

A narrative, posed by one man who was an illiterate, and since many portions were lost in the centuries since it was proclaimed, then the Qur'an, according to your measurement, is . . . well . . . more crap to be discarded.

Thanks!

That clears this whole thing up.

Originally posted by poet1b
reply to post by Ownification

 

When you give people liberty, combined with high immigration, you get high crime rates.

Yeah blame liberty and the immigrants.

We still consider them to be crimes, and we punish people who commit these crimes, and that is all the difference in the world. In the Muslim world, it seems that crimes are overlooked in the name of religion. That is not acceptable.

And who should determine what actions should be punished and what should not? That is the difference between your society and Islamic. Muslims believe it should be GOD, Western believe it should be us. Both have advantages and disadvantages, you shouldn't claim yours is any better than the Islamic.

The difference you would notice(if examined) is the fact that the Islamic justice system has a boundary and the boundary is Quran. Wester justice system is free on its own. Now we both would agree that every thing needs boundaries, right?

Being that so many people choose to live in our country, often making great sacrifices just to come and live in our country, it is easy to see that people are willing to endure the abuse of liberty over the loss of liberty. This certainly doesn't translate into it being acceptable to overlook crimes in the name of humanity, as you seem to imply.

They want to live in your country because your country back the dictators who are destroying their livelihoods. Saudi Arabia is just one example. Do you really believe Saudi Arabia would allow such laws to be implemented if America didn't guarantee the king's position? Islam has its own debate going on inside, just like Democracy. And if America stop giving guarantee notices to every dictator who supports American interests, we wouldn't be in this situation in the first place.

One could simply argue that child brides are not suitable in this age and at the same time not acceptable through Islam but the problem comes when no debate is allowed in Nations such as Saudi Arabia, where America has given the dictator a guarantee notice. Obama called for change, but here we are again.

reply to post by chise61


Do I have to? Please just read the discussion between me and poet, I'm sure you will learn much.

If you really want me to reply to your post than ask, I can't have a discussion with three people at a time. I have a life(I think)

reply to post by Ownification


Nope you don't have to do anything that you don't want to, freedom of choice you know.

I'm not going to attempt to read any more of the posts between the three of you. You guys are makin me crazy, i'm sorry i'm not trying to be insulting with this comment, but it's the best way i can get my point out, you three make me feel like i'm watchin a cpl of dogs chasing their tails you just keep goin round and round in circles and never catch anything for all of your effort.

reply to post by Ownification


"Do you really believe Saudi Arabia would allow such laws to be implemented if America didn't guarantee the king's position? Islam has its own debate going on inside, just like Democracy. And if America stop giving guarantee notices to every dictator who supports American interests, we wouldn't be in this situation in the first place. "


Can you answer this though ?

How long have such laws been in effect in Saudi Arabia ?

that is blatant misrepresentation.

they upheld the vows of marriage they did not pass a legal measure adopting the practice of pedohilia.

these cultures thats what people do.

besides if it was wrong to then females would not develop reproductive organs until they were 18 and from what i see on maury that is not whats going down.


this should be deleted its offensive to saudi arabia our ally in the war on terror!

reply to post by tigpoppa


Just because females are born with reproductive organs does not mean that they are ready to be used, i'm sure you are old enough to know about puberty. A female must at least enter into puberty before she can concieve a child. Also just because a female body has come into puberty does not mean that she is physically or emotionally ready for sex, pregnancy, motherhood, or marriage Geesh man you might as well just have said if they're old enough to bleed, they're old enough to breed, but then again i guess you basically did.

Maury, really ?????

What vows of marriage did they uphold ? An 8 year old child does not have the emotional or mental maturity to consent to marriage and take vows !


There was no mariage here, a father used his 8 year old daughter to pay off his debt for cripes sake, he sold her as a sex slave !

Oh by all means let's not offend an ally over an innocent defenseless 8 year old child

Originally posted by chise61
reply to post by tigpoppa

 

Geesh man you might as well just have said if they're old enough to bleed, they're old enough to breed, but then again i guess you basically did.

I think that's the bottom-line logic for the supporters of this simplistic narrow-minded rational. If god designed women to bare children at such a young age, then once they are physically capable they should conceive. Unfortunately the mind and heart are not factored into this equation, which to me is morally bankrupt. A twisted irony/hypocrisy that these "flawless" texts are revered as an absolute divine authority.

According to this female puberty chart from www.obgyn.net...

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/3022c1e0d4bd.jpg[/atsimg]
... you can see the average age for a girl to get her first period is between 12 & 13, but by the green bar some have their first as early as 9. So i can see that the first sign of red gave the writers of the "holy" books the green light to stamp it "permission granted" under the accepting eye of law/god.

Which only reinforces a series of dehumanizing "beliefs" that women have only one purpose in life... that they have no higher calling then producing children... so therefore what's the point of having them schooled ...or have any male relationships out side of the family.

[edit on 17-4-2009 by The All Seeing I]

Originally posted by chise61
reply to post by Ownification

 

"Do you really believe Saudi Arabia would allow such laws to be implemented if America didn't guarantee the king's position? Islam has its own debate going on inside, just like Democracy. And if America stop giving guarantee notices to every dictator who supports American interests, we wouldn't be in this situation in the first place. "


Can you answer this though ?

How long have such laws been in effect in Saudi Arabia ?

Since 1400 years back.

I know where you are going with this so I will play along and ask, what is your point?

*Snip*

Mod Note: General ATS Discussion Etiquette – Please Review This Link.


The Discussion of "Board Business" is NOT the thread topic



[edit on 4/17/2009 by semperfortis]

reply to post by The All Seeing I


See that's one of the biggest problems right there is the misbelief that some people have that as soon as a girl gets her period she is physically ready to have children. That just isn't true even if you completely disregard the emotional and mental the physical still isn't ready, there is still more physical maturing that needs to happen. Example a young girl that has just started getting her periods does not yet have the hip structure needed to allow a baby to pass thru easily, (not that it's easy when you're an adult) and that can cause complications and be dangerous for both the mother and the child.

I can't believe that there are still people in this world in this day and age that still actually believe that just because a young girl has gotten her period that she is now a woman

Neandrathals that still believe that a woman's sole purpose is to bring children into this world, and can have no other meaningful purpose and are to be treated as second class citizens more than likely have these beliefs because they are insecure about their own meaningful purpose in this world. And for those who so badly mistreat and subjugate women under the pretense of "their God" i hope that when their time on this earth is finished and they go to meet their God, they find that she is a woman and has some justice in store for them and what they've done.

reply to post by Ownification


I see no reason why they would remove it as long as we are being civil with one another, and we're not hijacking the thread.

Then you know that my point is going to be that if these laws have been in effect in saudi Arabia for over 1400 years then America has nothing to do with those laws.


I am in no way trying to diminish the fact that our government has played a role in some of the atrocities in other countries by continuing to back their leaders, among other things. However i am saying that the main reason that these laws are still in effect is because the citizens of the country don't do enough to change to them. Americans can not blame another country for what our government does, we can only blame our government and ourselves for allowing it to happen. But i must inform you that a lot of what our government has done has been without our knowledge, and it's only through people like the many on this sight that work to uncover and expose the truth, that many find out about what has been done.


I may be wrong but i believe that there are many men in these countries that never want these laws to be changed simply because they enjoy having this dominence over women, and of course women have no right to voice their opinions.


If you don't mind i have a few more questions for you, simply because i am trying to find out things that i have no knowledge of and i would rather make an attempt at understanding what i am unfamiliar with rather than judging it. I do not personally know any Muslims so it is hard for me to understand a lot of what i come across, but when my youngest son was in high school he had some Muslim friends in school, when i was in high school i had never even heard of Muslims. He explained to me that there are two different sects of Muslims, I believe it's Sunni and Shi'a ?


He says that one is more extreme than the other and i can never seem to remember which one, i believe it's the Shi'a that is more extreme, please correct me if i'm wrong.


My question is are these laws, the ones pertaining to this little girl, Sunni laws, Shi'a laws, or do both sects follow these laws ?


He also told me that sodomy is against Muslim law. Is sodomy against Muslim law, and if it is why would there be a law that allows a little girl to be sodomized ?


I hope that you understand that my questions are not meant to insult, or judge, but rather to learn and understand.