Warning! Sensitive content! Proceed with caution!

[Valjean]

Isn't "normal" just a statistical average? Wouldn't "natural" or "innate" be a more productive approach?

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Isn't "normal" just a statistical average? Wouldn't "natural" or "innate" be a more productive approach?

I suppose this is fine given the importance of semantic nitpicking, over the substance of ideas, on rf.

 

[Riverwolf]

Yes. There is no normal physiological drive to have sex with children. Those who have sexual desire for children have something abnormal about their psychology. What year it is is irrelevant to biology.

We haven't established that we're talking about a child. Were people in puberty still seen as children in those days?

 

[Riverwolf]

I suppose this is fine given the importance of semantic nitpicking, over the substance of ideas, on rf.

Well, ideas are conveyed with words, and even if an idea has substance, if the incorrect words are used, the wrong idea will be conveyed.

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

We haven't established that we're talking about a child. Were people in puberty still seen as children in those days?

That seems to be the crux of it. Cultural assumptions are powerful. It's not easy to accept that a 12-year-old post-puberty female could have been seen as a 'woman' in other cultures.

 

[Riverwolf]

That seems to be the crux of it. Cultural assumptions are powerful. It's not easy to accept that a 12-year-old post-puberty female could have been seen as a 'woman' in other cultures.

I believe it was only until recently that most of the time, children were seen as miniature adults.

 

[AhmadSyahir]

Save your breath Riverwolf. Killgore Trout have no meant on discussing. He just extending this so-called 'discussion'. The answer is clear and I assume there's nothing more to talk about. You know it.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Save your breath Riverwolf. Killgore Trout have no meant on discussing. He just extending this so-called 'discussion'. The answer is clear and I assume there's nothing more to talk about. You know it.

Yes, I have no intention of discussing whether it's okay to stick your penis inside little girls. The answer is clear.

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

I believe it was only until recently that most of the time, children were seen as miniature adults.

I'm not sure exactly what you mean, but my belief is that the concept of 'childhood' keeps getting pushed later and later as societies evolve and can afford to think that way about it. In early America, 10- and 12-year-olds hit the fields and starting working. They saddled horses, drove buggies, went to town for supplies.

Going back even further, I feel sure that a 14-year-old female -- living in a hunter-gatherer society -- was viewed as mature. My guess is that puberty was seen as the demarkation from child to adult, just as it is with all other animals.

That's my general opinion from all that I've read and studied, anyway.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

I'm not sure exactly what you mean, but my belief is that the concept of 'childhood' keeps getting pushed later and later as societies evolve and can afford to think that way about it. In early America, 10- and 12-year-olds hit the fields and starting working. They saddled horses, drove buggies, went to town for supplies.

Going back even further, I feel sure that a 14-year-old female -- living in a hunter-gatherer society -- was viewed as mature. My guess is that puberty was seen as the demarkation from child to adult, just as it is with all other animals.

That's my general opinion from all that I've read and studied, anyway.

All evidence points towards kids entering puberty at younger and younger ages in modern times.

 

[AmbiguousGuy]

All evidence points towards kids entering puberty at younger and younger ages in modern times.

I've heard of that but don't know enough to have a strong opinion. What is hard for me to imagine is that sex with prepubescents has ever been common and accepted in a major society. In other words, my opinion is that it has always been generally seen as a perversion.

So I agree with others that the critical question is whether Mohammad's young wife had passed through puberty.

 

[Riverwolf]

Save your breath Riverwolf. Killgore Trout have no meant on discussing. He just extending this so-called 'discussion'. The answer is clear and I assume there's nothing more to talk about. You know it.

Yeah, I do. But you've seen how stubborn I can be. ^_^

 

[Riverwolf]

I've heard of that but don't know enough to have a strong opinion. What is hard for me to imagine is that sex with prepubescents has ever been common and accepted in a major society. In other words, my opinion is that it has always been generally seen as a perversion.

So I agree with others that the critical question is whether Mohammad's young wife had passed through puberty.

And because he remained a beloved figure, I think it's likely.

 

[AhmadSyahir]

Yes, I have no intention of discussing whether it's okay to stick your penis inside little girls. The answer is clear.

Just like I said. You're trying to fool and provoke people. The hadith about Aisha R.A married to Muhammad S.A.W has been there for centuries. It's not changed nor deleted from history by muslim even we know that our enemy can use it as a weapon to kill the character of Muhammad S.A.W. Aisha was engaged to a non-muslim when she was 6 years old and he married to Muhammad S.A.W some years later. This show that it's impossible for Aisha to
engaged to Muhammad S.A.W when he was 7. Aisha has joined series of wars.
Muhammad S.A.W has set a strict rule for those who want to join the war must be 15 and above (if I'm not mistaken).

Age Siti Aishah during the battle of Uhud Uhud occurred on the 15th of Shawwal, the year 3 AH / 625 AD in March of Iman Bukari says in his book: Kitabu'l-jihad wa'l-Siyar, Arabic, Chapter Ghazwi'l-Nisa 'wa qitalihinna ma `a'lrijal." Narrated Anas: on the day of Uhud ..... I saw Siti Aishah (ra) and Umm i Sulaim, they pull their lowest part of their cloth a bit to help them move. "Prophet imposing strict conditions for their to be in accordance with the Battle of Badr, Uhud and the Trench. They must be aged 15 years and above. Anyone under the age of 15 years, not allowed to attend the Battle of Badr, Uhud and Khandaq.

Narrated by Bukari in his book: Kitabu'l-maghazi, Chapter ghazwati'l-Trench wa-ahza'b hiya'l, "Ibn Umar (ra) says that the Prophet did not allow me to join the battle of Uhud because at that time I was 14 years. But in time of war the Trench, Rasulullah allowed me to join because I was 15 years old.

According to history Siti Aishah participated in the battle of Badr and Uhud. This means she is 15 years of age and above. Based on the history of Bukari clearly demonstrated;

1. Siti Aishah followed the Battle of Uhud and he had reached the age of 15 years.

2. If her age in 625 AD (3 AH) is 15 years old so she was born in 610 Comments

3. Siti Aishah married the Prophet Muhammad in AD 623 equal to 1 AH means that he is 14 years of age.

You should never insult the Messenger of any religion because it mean that you insult the religion. Another word of saying that Muhammad S.A.W bang a 9 years old girl should be considered as insulting.

 

[Riverwolf]

Yes, I have no intention of discussing whether it's okay to stick your penis inside little girls. The answer is clear.

Just like I said. You're trying to fool and provoke people. The hadith about Aisha R.A married to Muhammad S.A.W has been there for centuries. It's not changed nor deleted from history by muslim even we know that our enemy can use it as a weapon to kill the character of Muhammad S.A.W. Aisha was engaged to a non-muslim when she was 6 years old and he married to Muhammad S.A.W some years later. This show that it's impossible for Aisha to
engaged to Muhammad S.A.W when he was 7. Aisha has joined series of wars.
Muhammad S.A.W has set a strict rule for those who want to join the war must be 15 and above (if I'm not mistaken).

Age Siti Aishah during the battle of Uhud Uhud occurred on the 15th of Shawwal, the year 3 AH / 625 AD in March of Iman Bukari says in his book: Kitabu'l-jihad wa'l-Siyar, Arabic, Chapter Ghazwi'l-Nisa 'wa qitalihinna ma `a'lrijal." Narrated Anas: on the day of Uhud ..... I saw Siti Aishah (ra) and Umm i Sulaim, they pull their lowest part of their cloth a bit to help them move. "Prophet imposing strict conditions for their to be in accordance with the Battle of Badr, Uhud and the Trench. They must be aged 15 years and above. Anyone under the age of 15 years, not allowed to attend the Battle of Badr, Uhud and Khandaq.

Narrated by Bukari in his book: Kitabu'l-maghazi, Chapter ghazwati'l-Trench wa-ahza'b hiya'l, "Ibn Umar (ra) says that the Prophet did not allow me to join the battle of Uhud because at that time I was 14 years. But in time of war the Trench, Rasulullah allowed me to join because I was 15 years old.

According to history Siti Aishah participated in the battle of Badr and Uhud. This means she is 15 years of age and above. Based on the history of Bukari clearly demonstrated;

1. Siti Aishah followed the Battle of Uhud and he had reached the age of 15 years.

2. If her age in 625 AD (3 AH) is 15 years old so she was born in 610 Comments

3. Siti Aishah married the Prophet Muhammad in AD 623 equal to 1 AH means that he is 14 years of age.

You should never insult the Messenger of any religion because it mean that you insult the religion. Another word of saying that Muhammad S.A.W bang a 9 years old girl should be considered as insulting.

IOW, it's just as I suspected. We aren't dealing with a little girl.

 

[AhmadSyahir]

IOW, it's just as I suspected. We aren't dealing with a little girl.

The hadith about Aisha married when he was seven was narrated by a man who learn a lot from his father which have been moved from Medina to Iran (Shia's territory). If you read Shia's view, it will say that they hate Aisha. I heard, this hadith was not even know by the people of Medina. But don't get me wrong, it's not the narrator that can't be trusted, the saying of the narrator's father was considered weak by Ulama' after he moved to Iran.

 

[illykitty]

I used to have an issue with this part of Islam until I read about the life of people back then, in that area. Then I read about the context of their marriage. Aisha was very mature and I think she really did love him, as she continued to believe in Islam and even had a wonderful role, she taught a lot to others. Women could come to her for advice on subjects that made them shy. It doesn't sound to me that Aisha got traumatised by the experiance of being wed to Muhammad (PBUH).

Anyway, I do not have any issues with this and anyone who reads carefully the context and see how much joy and love there was between them would realise that it wasn't done against her will. On her age, many sites said that she was a teenager but there's no way to know for sure. All I need to know is that she was happy to be with him. It's a wonderful love story!

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Just like I said. You're trying to fool and provoke people.

I'm not trying to fool or provoke anybody. For those who actually read for comprehension, my only argument is that any man who is sexually attracted to a nine year old has something wrong with them. I'm not even discussing Islam. I'm talking about any sicko who wants to have sex with a nine year old girl.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

You should never insult the Messenger of any religion because it mean that you insult the religion. Another word of saying that Muhammad S.A.W bang a 9 years old girl should be considered as insulting.

I don't know whether he banged a nine year old or not. And I don't really care. I assume anything written about him is highly suspect, so I doubt we know very much about the reality of whoever the Mohammed character in Islam is based on.

Once again, for those paying attention, my only argument is that adult men who want to have sex with nine year old girls are screwed up in the head. Period.

 

[Skeptisch]

IOW, it's just as I suspected. We aren't dealing with a little girl.

But we are dealing with a nine year old girl, are we not?