Brett on Harry’s Place has noticed yet another scandal from Osama Saeed – on his blog back in 2006 he recommended the unpleasant anti-gay site Eye on ‘Gay Muslims’ as a blog “[w]ell worth checking out”.
Eye on ‘Gay Muslims’ (I am repelled as I type those scare quotes) is a site written by a chap called Rashid Eldin who tells gay Muslims that there is no place for them in Islam, calls the estimable organisation Imaan‘s ‘Europride‘ event a “parade of perversion” and also recomends lectures by Yasir Qadhi.
Here is Qadhi talking about homosexuality.
It’s a long video and mainly it is concerned with Qadhi’s backwards views on women, but scroll through to 32 minutes where Qadhi starts to reminisce about the good old 80s when it was OK to abuse gays – and how society has “regressed” since then as you can’t attack homosexuality without being thought a homophobe. Funny that.
Anyway, back to Eye on ‘Gay Muslims’ – it also recommends this article by (again) Yasir Qadhi where he is directing advice to a Muslim who thinks they might also be gay.
I advise you to seek counseling, and to go to people who will understand your situation and who can direct you in a more specific manner. I understand as well that if you go to many of the typical imams of the masjids, they would not sympathize with your situation at all and would probably make matters worse for you. I understand that you cannot go to such people. But you will find sympathetic ears to listen to your problem, insha’Allah.
And remember that marriage is a solution, so you should seriously consider it. The Prophet Lut ‘alayhis salam told his people, “These are my daughters, they are more pure for you.” Some scholars say that when he said “daughters”, he is also implying the women of the town and not just his own daughters. So he’s telling the men of his community who were guilty of this crime to go and marry women, for they are better and purer for them. Marriage is a solution, because sensuality and sexuality is something that can be satisfied – rather it should be satisfied – by the opposite gender within the confines of marriage.
Has Qadhi no concept of the damage he will be doing to vulnerable young people who have no choice about their sexuality but whom Qadhi is instructing to enter into loveless shams of marriages? And has he absolutely no consideration for the wife of that marriage whose husband would be unable to love her as a husband should? Potentially, also, his advice will be destroying the lives of any children from that marriage if and when their father decides to stop living a lie and to be honest with the people closest to him.
Eye on ‘Gay Muslims” own Rashid Eldin has also commented on Osama Saeed’s blog recommending Straightway, an organisation which tries to “cure” gay Muslims. The idea that a young person struggling with an important facet of their personality – their sexuality – should be told to suppress it is horrifically bad advice which can only lead to personal and psychological problems in the future.
So, Osama Saeed, will you live up to the SNP’s value statement and reject discrimination and prejudice of all kinds – and that is the party for which you are a parliamentary candidate – by renouncing your endorsement of Eye on ‘Gay Muslims’, or will you continue to stand with a collection of individuals who do not think that homosexuals deserve happy and balanced psychological, emotional and personal lives?
63 Comments
The Eye on ‘Gay Muslims’ is indeed a dreadful site and Rashid Eldin of the ‘Ex-Gay Muslim Movement’, who runs it, comes across as a most bitter and twisted ego-maniac.
As for the other two ‘scripture-backed’ homophobic tossers…well, Salafis will be Salafis.
Not sure Osama Saeed’s complete credo can be bundled into the term ‘Salafi’ though.
“Muslim Brotherhood flavoured candidate for the far Left SNP” would be more appropriate. No argument with the “scripture-backed’ homophobic tosser” descriptor though, that’s spot on.
Did someone say ‘ex-gay Muslim’. So he used to be gay and then saw the light. No wonder he believes gays can be ‘cured’.
Rasheed Eldin claims not to be an ‘ex-gay’ and recoils from such an heinous label. He has never been homosexual. He’s straight as a die, alright? He’s just a normal heterosexual, anti-queer Muslim homophobe.
my people, i’m not clear about the information that you have sent me
Eldin accepts only comments that support his stance. He uses censorship. His site is indeed a strange and queer place to be.
its sad to see you folks blinded by the programming of today’s media. to think that the popular belief (without any medical proof) is that people are ‘born’ gay. so, if i am born a psycho and have tendencies of a serial killer, shall i be allowed to wreck havoc? or if i am born a rapist, shall i go around raping others? get a life and wake up.
People who are born gay are not asking for the right to be serial killers or rapists.
The victims of serial killers and and rapists did not consent to being killed or raped.
Grow a brain.
Poop Deck you moron! The point is that all of this is ABNORMAL UNNATURAL behavior. we punish one while we do not punish the other. consent has nothing to do with it. if a woman consents to be a man’s second wife; is that ok?!
So now you saying that a woman who consents to being a man’s second wife is showing “ABNORMAL UNNATURAL behavior” – and is equivalent to being a serial killer or a rapist?
I am pretty sure Yasir Qadhi doesn’t agree with you on that one!
not at all;
I’m saying that consent doesn’t make unnatural behavior acceptable and cannot be used to make something inherently abnormal to be normal.
killing is wrong and abnormal behavior? if person A consents to die by person B’s hands, is that ok because there is consent?
The element of consent means that you can no longer call someone a rapist. It is called consensual sex. It is immaterial whether you regard the act as “unnatural and abnormal” or not.
In the UK it is illegal for people to have more than one spouse not because it is “unnatural or abnormal” but because it is against the law. If that were a case of “abnormality”, it would mean Muslims believe in a faith which allows “abnormal and unnatural” acts, and I’m sure you don’t really want to say that, do you?
the element of consent doesn’t ‘allow’ homosexuality. simple and straight (pun intended, hehe)
In the UK, I am sure if you slept with your mother, with consent, it would be perfectly ok, no?!!?? ofcourse it would be because of the element of consent!
polygyny is another matter.
“In the UK, I am sure if you slept with your mother, with consent, it would be perfectly ok, no?!!?? ofcourse it would be because of the element of consent!”
No that would be an example of incest, and in the UK incest is illegal. It is also regarded as unnatural and abnoral in almost all cultures, is it not?
An example of homosexuality as both illegal and unnatural would be if a father slept with his son.
“polygyny is another matter.”
But it is neither unnatural nor illegal in Islam.
yes, ofcourse its illegal! duh! hehe. and so homosexuality should be illegal also.
out of curiosity; why is incest illegal in the UK? what is the basis of this ruling?
Polygyny is legal in Islam but homosexuality is not.
“why is incest illegal in the UK? what is the basis of this ruling?”
Because it is conventionally considered to be a taboo in almost all cultures. Should incest be made legal between consenting adults? There seems to be a distinct lack of a popular campaign going back decades tring to legalise it and standing up for the rights of practioners of incest. Things might be different in a 100 years from now.
By the same token, most Muslims don’t want paedophilia to be normalised in society even though the Prophet Mo married a 5 year old girl and his example is regarded as the “Best of men”.
At the end of the day, people are not stupid.
You consider homosexuality to be a taboo. But it is legal here in the UK and I’m afraid you will have to abide by the law, if not popular culture, since many, many people who are gay would be needlessly criminalised if it were still considered an illegal act.
funny that you have no logic whatsoever to support the illegality of incest?! other than the taboo crap.
so one fine day, if you decide to campaign for incest to be legalized along with a bunch of other sick people, should it be allowed? i am dying to know the answer to this.
Whenever muslims state the prohibition of anything, they have scriptural backing.
the prophet’s marriage to an alleged child is another matter and if you want to discuss that, please state that explicitly and I would LOVE to educate you on that.
i dont consider homosexuality to be a taboo; i consider it to be an abomination punishable by God as the muslims and catholics both believe this with scriptural evidence. the societical evidence of taboo that you present means nothing because that can change at any time any place.
I see throwing in the matter of incest has confused you even more. I have no intention to dispute the illegality of incest.
The only reason why you hate homosexuality is because it is “abomination punishable by God as the muslims and catholics both believe this with scriptural evidence”.
And yet paedophilia is not an abomination punishable by God either in Islam or Catholicism and even the Prophet Mo practiced it – but most Muslims do not want to see it normalised in society.
So you see, using religion to back up your prejudices does not make a consistent body of ethics to denounce whatever offends you.
it seems that you were born confused; my analogy was that just like incest is abnormal, so is homosexuality. the only reason any of this offends me is because there is scriptural evidence. the only reason there is scriptural evidence is because both these acts are ABNORMAL. you apparently need to go to college (go back to college if you havent already).
as as mohammed and paedophilia go; it is clear that you have been brain washed. as i said earlier, please formally start this discussion with me and I would love to educate your ignorant little being.
bring it on.
You claim to base your abhorrence of incest and homosexuality on the presence of “scriptural evidence”. Does that mean you regard paedophilia as acceptable, since there is no “scriptural evicence” against it and is not, for you, an “abomination punishable by God” and was practiced by the Prophet Mo?
pedophilia is a modern concept and i would like you to define it first and then we can commence the journey of your re-education of the false propagation of the ‘pedophile prophet of islam’ .
awaiting for your response.
You know exactly what paedophilia is and it doesn’t need to be defined any more than homosexuality or incest does. But it is noted that you are now faffing around for definitions in order to avoid answering the simple question – which is this:
Do you regard paedophilia as acceptable and not an “abomination punishable by God”, since there is no “scriptural evidence” against it and was practiced by the Prophet Mo?
LOL.
if i am indeed ‘faffing’ the question as you naively claim, why don’t you humor me and define pedophilia for the record.
and just for the record Prophet Mohammed did not practice pedophilia. you will have to prove that he did and for that you will have to define it.
who is ‘faffing’ now, ‘mate’?!!?
See how your argument shifts when the matter of Prophet Mo’s paedophilia is brought into the argument? You have just proved my point.
The point is, you clearly don’t require “definitions” of incest or rape when you want to impose your values. But your values tell you that there is a problem with paedophilia even though it is not defined as a “abomination punishable by God” in either the Islamic or Christian texts. And neither are incest or rape, for that matter!
We set up our own morality system with or without religious texts. But they sure come in handy when we want to have our prejudices reinforced.
why are you avoiding defining pedophilia? there is no shift of argument. please dont assume to know my values, because you have no idea.
so simply, the answer to your question is that the Prophet Mohammad did not practice or engage in Pedophilia. the burden of proof is on you, Pooper. so either prove it by defining it (very simple task) or shut up.
You asked for it: Paedophilia is sex with a minor. And as you know, Ayesha was a minor (age 5) when she was married to Prophet Mo, and still a minor (age 9) when the marriage was consummated. These are confirmed by reliable hadeeth and other historical records.
The onus is on you to say that that is not paedophilia, which I am pretty sure that that is what you will strive to do.
My question still stands, in spite of your efforts to avoid answering it.
Do you regard paedophilia as acceptable and not an “abomination punishable by God”, since there is no “scriptural evidence” against it and was practiced by the Prophet Mo?
Hallelujah!
Pooper is alive!
Aisha was a minor according to your the current filthy societal norms of today, Pooper! not according to Islam!
- current societical norms(last 100 years or so, maybe?) define age with reference to marriageability (sexual consent) and this age varies from country to country in the West. Some countries, an adult is defined at 18 and in others at 13(Spain-if i were to engage a 13 year old in Spain, I would be prosecuted for it in say, the UK). These norms were not there say 1000 years ago and I am sure kings of Europe legally took young girls (who had reached puberty) as wives, etc.
- Pedophilia is, briefly, defined as a condition where an adult takes sexual interest in PREPUBESCENT children(an individual is not a child after reaching puberty regardless of age). Generally 5 years or less. Additionally, pedophilia doesn’t entail marriage; it’s simply abuse. Pedophiles either abuse children (there is no marriage to those children) by abduction or by purchase.
- Islam allows marriage as per the natural and biological order, i.e. for women, menstruation and puberty; the activation of her biological clock – the time when she can carry a baby to term. To put an age on that is pretty naïve as it varies from place to place, person to person and has varied from time to time. Even today, some girls reach puberty earlier than others.
- Pedophilia entails abuse and those who have experienced it generally suffer lasting negative emotional and psychological effects. Aisha RA was not only emotionally and psychologically sound, but extremely normal and healthy and an extremely celebrated scholar of the Ummah. Not only was she wise but also very knowledgeable. Does this sound like someone who is a victim of pedophilia?
Your shallow culture/western ruling(100 years old max due to its everchanging nature?) does not define the rules/regulations of Islam(unchanged since Mohammed’s time).
So there we have it:
Sex with pre-pubescent children is perfectly because the Prophet Mo practised it, which funnily enough, was why it wasn’t an “abomination punishable by God”.
But homosexuality between adults is abnormal because of “scriptural evidence”.
Well done!
Good luck with trying to smuggle in your 6 year old bride from the hills of Pakistan where the “shallow culture/western ruling” against marriage to children is probably normative and encouraged as Sunnah.
did you even read the response, you ignorant fool?!!!
what proof do you have that the prophet engaged in sex with prepubescent anyone?! i just told you that aisha had reached puberty and according to islam and all the sources. do you have proof otherwise?! you are laughably pathetic.
So the Prophet Mo waited till Ayesha reached puberty at the age of 9 before he had sex with her. That’s okay then!
Yes, the marriage was consummated at age 9, after she had clearly crossed over to being an adult and according to Islam, the distinction between an adult and a child is merely menstruation/puberty(being able to bear a child) in the case of women. it doesn’t really matter what the current perverted notions of western society dictate (all the nations of europe cannot agree on one consensual age!).
Ironically, no one else at that time had any issue with this (we all know how much the pagan arabs welcomed a chance to try and slander the Prophet peace and blessings upon him).
he fakes, he shoots, he scores. nothing but net. (reminiscing college days)
you need to do better, Pooper.
If the marriage to a nine-year old child is so completely normal and acceptable by Allah, why haven’t Muslims adopted the marriage of pubescent girls throughout history? Or was that another one of those special dispensation allowed to Prophet Mo alone, as in the case of 9 wives?
The point being, what made most Muslims throughout history politely reject the marriage to prepubescent girls, even though the “Best of men” was an “adopter” of the practice?
now, now, step at a time Pooper.
why do you continue to assume that Prophet Mohammed took aisha as a wife when she was prepubescent without an iota of proof?!? please stop being a parrot!
we have already established that Aisha had very much reached puberty and infact there was atleast another suitor for her at that time.
additionally, there are numerous occasions, where muslims have taken young wives (after they reached puberty), just like british and european kings took 9-year old brides, however, this practice has been as uncommon as polygyny has been uncommon. just because something is allowed doesnt mean it becomes popular practice.
So, in conclusion;
Aisha had reached puberty, hence by islamic definition, she was not a child anymore hence making it perfectly acceptable for her to be married
Nicely avoided.
not at all; I assure you, I am not in the business of avoiding!
It has been a pleasure, however.
Question for you – do you think it is perfectly acceptable for a Muslim adult male of 30+ years of age to marry a 9 year old girl? (Provided she has reached puberty, of course!
)
Do you want my personal point of view?! i.e. whether I would engage in it or not?
You or anyone – do you think it is perfectly acceptable for a Muslim adult male of 30+ years of age to marry a 9 year old girl?
It is sickening that anyone, even ” the prophet,” would have sex with a girl of 9. Whether she had reached puberty or not.
It’s very typical of religious adherents in general, and Muslims in particular, to obfuscate and hedge, to avoid the main issue, to equivocate, etc., in order to defend an absurd hypothesis such as this one. It is so apparent, so utterly obvious, that sex with a 9 year old is evil, that the main issue, puberty or not, is the ability to make a mature decision.
It is so nauseating that anyone would defend sex with a 9 year old.
What has happened, I think, is this: Muslims are trained not to question with an open mind. In many places, in fact, to doubt or question the Koran, or the integrity of the ” prophet,” carries a death sentence. So they have to reconcile somehow the many assertions of, for example, the moral perfection of the ” prophet” with his many, many evil acts. One popular strategy is to “interpret it out,” whereby it is claimed the Koranic injunction, or observation, or whatever, actually means something else than it says. It’s absurd, of course, and intellectually dishonest, though I have to give the ” interpreters” credit for being
extremely creative. I think it may even be art.
The fear, hatred, and persecution of gays is perhaps the stand-alone example of Islamic bigotry, derived of course from the Koran. The amount of suffering – including torture and murder – that has been perpetrated on gays by Muslims is unbelievable. Omer Idrees is just another Koran inspired bigot. You can’t argue with bigots. It is unfortunate the degree of harm they do, of course, but they are beyond the reach of logic and reason: what the Koran says is the last word, period, and, as noted above, there can be no questioning of it’s authority.
Just for the record, homosexuality isn’t “unnatural,” or even abnormal. It’s just unusual. The critical issue is that it hurts nobody. But, nevertheless, intolerance of it is the new paradigm among Muslims, along with anti-semitism, since that’s what is instructed by the horrible book, cobbled together from other religions 1400 years ago.
It’s really a lovely religion, isn’t it?
@Poop Deck; we aren’t talking about what I, living in 2011, find acceptable. We are talking about the legitimacy of the act in itself according to scriptural evidence.
@Gary; where have you been, you misguided moron?! we missed you in our discussion. Its sad to see that you have not addressed a single one of the points that I put out there. Maybe you find the sex with a 9 year old girl (having reached puberty) disgusting, but who cares what you find disgusting! These norms are defined about a hundred years ago anyway. Prior to that, many royal members of the European kingdoms took 9 year old brides. So does that mean that your Royal lineage is a product of something disgusting?! Its a very simple natural order; you reach puberty and you can start a family.
Do you know that if I were to marry a 13 year old (her having reached puberty and with her consent), I would be prosecuted in the US but NOT IN SPAIN!!! so who decides whether its ‘disgusting’ to marry a 13 year old or not? you or the US government or what?
Get a life; find God or something.
and yes homosexuality is abnormal. i have scriptural evidence. what do you have? ‘Gary’s evidence’! LOL.
You missed my point, Omer. It would be quite funny, actually, if it weren’t the sort of thing that generates unbelievable suffering.
“Scriptural evidence” is derived from Islamic scriptures. Why would anyone believe that crap? You’re comparing “scriptural evidence” to real science? Are you KIDDING? This is what I meant by the deliberate turning off of the mental faculties that religion in general advocates: don’t question the veracity of what it says in the Koran, Omer, whatever you do!
And yes, there is overwhelming evidence that homosexuality is natural. For instance, it happens in nature all the time. All you have to do is google it: there are even pictures. But I guess you haven’t done that, have you Omer? Everything you need is in the Koran. And you use the Koran to justify persecution.
Again, what a lovely religion.
Finally, the answer is yes: if my “royal lineage” is the consequence of people having sex with 9 year olds, then yes, it’s the result of something disgusting. Not sure what you’re getting at here; seems like a no brained. But I guess you’re okay with sex with 9 year olds. You don’t care about their suffering. Because your great hero did it.
Sick.
Anyone else you hate and fear because of “scriptural evidence”? Jews maybe?
This is my last and only post to you: as I said, you can’t argue with bigots: they’re beyond reason, since they have “scriptural evidence” to rely on. They’ve already turned off their brains.
Omer, don’t be wilfully stupid. Just because an outright abuse was an considered acceptable in the 7th century, the 17th century or the 20th century does not, in any way, justify it at any point.
The proof is this: Muslims have not universally accepted the marriage of pubescent girls in the 14 centuries since Prophet Mo married a 9 year old girl. Because it was an abuse then as it is now, as it has been since.
Furthermore, a child who reaches puberty does not suddently become a sexually mature adult ready for sex and marriage. She is still a child. Prophet Mo was a paedophile, whichever age he lived in.
And finally, since by your logic, you can justify paedophilia because you claim it was a social norm acceptable in the 7th century when Mo married Ayesha, what is the problem with accepting homosexuality today, since it is now a social norm in the 21st century?
who should i address first?!
@Poop Deck; no one is being willfully stupid, here. get it together now.
you have not read a word of my response. Your definition of Pedophilia is defined no more than 100 years ago and I reject that definition; its irrelevant. Its that simple. Its got nothing to do with what the Prophet SAW did or did not do. Again, we are talking of a biological line of division. As far as you say about sexual maturity and other aspects; who are you to define sexual maturity?
Ofcourse, if you wanna point to the sun and keep calling it the moon; be my guest and stay ignorant. but without an iota of proof – you stand at zero.
“As far as you say about sexual maturity and other aspects; who are you to define sexual maturity?
Ofcourse, if you wanna point to the sun and keep calling it the moon; be my guest and stay ignorant. but without an iota of proof – you stand at zero.”
Actually, that is exactly what you are doing. You are taking a 9 year old girl and saying she is sexually mature because this was the social norm in 7th century Arabia (which in itself, is a debatable claim).
@ Gary; I assure you, sir, that i kid you not. when i say scriptural evidence, i mean the quran and the bible. so i refer to muslims and catholics.
science?! HAHA; what science?! the science that claimed that space was ether? or the science that led the FDA to revise its health pyramid?! Get a life, Gary. there is no concrete evidence for the biological gay gene. ask me straight up if you want me to cite or give you a reference. none whatsoever. its baseless propaganda. as far as ‘nature’ goes; there is a crap load of other things that are ‘natural’ in the animal kingdom, which the humans do not practice.
Show me anywhere in history, where Aisha seemed to have suffered or there were symptoms of her suffering or any evidence that she had any negative effects of the marriage.
My point is that the Quran (and the Chruch in the past) define marriage-ability at the age of puberty; thats the defining line. whether your secular government (obviously, you are not smart enough to have developed the sexual consent age concept o on your own) defines pedophilia at below 13 or below 18; i frankly dont really care.
Neither did Aisha suffer from any post-pedophile effects, not was she abused or raped. she entered into a most respectable form of relationship in terms of a marriage and if you were so smart as to read the accounts of the two, you would be surprised. but you havent done that have you?!!! of course not. you have been brain washed by the western secular propaganda machine.
give it up guys. you cant take this one.
“Actually, that is exactly what you are doing. You are taking a 9 year old girl and saying she is sexually mature because this was the social norm in 7th century Arabia (which in itself, is a debatable claim).”
My definition of sexual maturity is the biological definition of sexual maturity which trumps any secular or modern concept of sexual maturity(and i can back this claim up using your so called modern science). Obviously, the consequences of the marriage between aisha RA and mohammed SAW prove you very wrong and prove me very right, because Aisha did not suffer from any effects that someone who experiences pedophilia suffers from. why is that? ask yourself that.
Sorry, the physiology of girls has not changed in 1,400 years. A child is still a child even if they have passed through puberty. Muslims know this, which is why they have not adopted this peculiar perversion of Prophet Mo’s as a Sunnah worth repeating.
Define child.
Puberty varies from place to place, time to time and person to person.
Its only a perversion in the eyes of a pervert.
Please do not talk about Sunnah, when you don’t even know what the definition is.
@Poop;
stop digging holes for yourself. first, you couldnt give me a universal definition of pedophilia and now you won’t be able to give me a definition of what a child is. get over yourself and give it up.
“first, you couldnt give me a universal definition of pedophilia and now you won’t be able to give me a definition of what a child is. “
Most Muslims know exactly what perversion is which is why they fully understand that no one wants to marry their children off at the age of 5. This was a dispensation given to Prophet Mo, who made his best friend, Abu Bakr, to aquiesce to this perverted arrangement.
ahahaha!!!!
narrated Poop Deck on the authority of Abu Poop Deck on the authority of Satan, “the Prophet SAW acquised his best friend Abu Bakr to marry his child daughter to him’!
LOLOL. go back and check your sources
you are a funny person and you are a loser.
I wasn’t quoting a hadeeth – just relaying a historical fact.
You see, you will defend the perversion but when push comes to shove, not many Muslims – no matter how deluded they are – will agree to marry off their 5 year old daughter to an adult male just for the sake of following a Tradition which, they truly know, is firmly rooted in the perverse.
You have nothing to support this so called ‘historical fact’.
I have already made it clear to you that just because the Prophet SAW did something PERMISSIBLE(not OBLIGATORY) does not mean that the entire Muslim population will do it(these are two separate matters). There are still Muslim families today in the middle east, afghanistan, indo-pak area, indonesia that marry their girls off after they reach puberty. its probably as uncommon as men who take more than one wife. whether the greater number of muslims practice something or not, doesn’t determine its permissibility. there is no pushing or shoving. its a very, very simple statement.
i told you; you cannot win this.
“You have nothing to support this so called ‘historical fact’. “
Tell us the facts behind how Prophet Mo married at 50 or the little girl Ayesha at 5, please.
If it was permissible then and the Prophet practiced paedophilia, it does not mean it is legal today. Hindus have reformed their religion such that the practice of burning widows at the pyre of their dead husbands has long been banned. The same should apply to child marriage in Muslim countries which are still backward enough to practice this institutionalised act of peversion.
And like I said, if what was permissible in the 7th century should make things acceptable today, then surely what is persmissible in our society today should also be regarded as acceptable today.
So you see, you cannot win the argument on the basis that homosexuality should be banned but paedophilic marriage should be permissible by law just because Prophet Mo was a practioner of the latter and eschewed the former. Sorry!
I have already won the argument ten times over. you just need to admit it now.
I was pointing at your ludicrous claim that you made, “This was a dispensation given to Prophet Mo, who made his best friend, Abu Bakr, to aquiesce to this perverted arrangement.”
Prove to me that ABu Bakr was acquiesced.
It seems that you are a little dull. I will go over it again to ease your stupitidy.
1)I have already explained to you that according to Islam, marriage is perfectly allowed when the girl reaches puberty, which Aisha RA had reached at the time of marriage.
2) pedophilia is a modern term and it entails abuse; there was no abuse done upon Aisha RA; she was perfectly healthy and normal. infact, she never once complained about the Prophet SAW, not even after his death. was she acquiesced too?!?
3) if the western society is defining an age bracket for marriage, i dont really care. my bracket for permissibility of marriage is defined by the biological definition given to me by islam. according to islam, the prophet was well within what islam defined. no one can disprove the islamic point of view on this.
4) homosexuality is forbidden explicitly in islam because not only is it abnormal, its truly disgusting. what Prophet Mohammed SAW did was not opposed by anyone ever, until now, which shows how shallow and worthless your arguement is that the only way you can make it is by choosing a dumb nickname and from sitting behind a computer, hiding.
so you see, i have won this argument and you have lost, because you have not addressed a single point of mine.
if i were married and had a daughter and the prophet mohammed was alive today, i would marry her to him at 5 in a heart beat and this is what every muslim will tell you. you cant beat us. many like you have come and gone; but islam has prevailed and it will.
bring it on loser.
would you two like to get a room?
yuck.
anyway, i seriously doubt that’s true, but i do suggest you mention this to anyone you are interested in marrying. i’m sure they’ll be delighted.
b’shalom
bananabrain
Your points 1-4 are the same ones why homosxuality in the 21st century should be perfectly acceptable to anyone who believes paedophilia was acceptable in the 7th century! And if you don’t, then you are contradicting your own justifications.
my points are the same because you failed to address them.
neither i nor islam define the marriage of Prophet Mohammed SAW with Aisha RA as pedophilia; you can banter all you want about it, however, homosexuality is defined very clearly in the Quran. go figure.
oh, and apparently, you lot cannot define pedophilia either!!
Omer is almost unbelievable. He worships the Koran blindly, following its absurd precepts. His arguments, aside from the spelling and grammatical errors, when they’re not ad hominem, are completely baseless: when criticized for believing the Koran blindly, he justifies himself by referring to the Koran. He also performs the bait and switch: he asks for evidence that homosexuality is natural, and when I give it to him, he says
there is a crap load of other things that are ‘natural’ in the animal kingdom, which the humans do not practice
Whether that’s true or not isn’t the point. He made the assertion: that we shouldn’t practice homosexuality, because it’s unnatural; faced with evidence that it IS natural, he changes his position, and says it doesn’t matter if it’s natural or not, because there are things in nature that we shouldn’t emulate. If he had any balls, he’d admit the cogency of the evidence (which is even photographic). But there is no possible evidence that he would admit, under any circumstances. This is the effect of the mind control aspect of Islam: you mustn’t question the veracity of the Koran, which is FULL of errors, no matter what. If you do, you’re subject to a death sentence.
It’s a shithole of a religion, and there is good evidence for this too: Islam has made shitholes out of many places on Earth, where women are often forced into marriages, STONED to death for adultery, where homosexuals and nonbelievers are EXECUTED. Even so, they delude themselves into believing it’s the ‘religion of peace.’
The best thing is just to ignore omer; it’s a shame, I know, what damage he and others like him will do, especially to those who DARE to challenge Islam, but there is no arguing with him: there are no circumstances where he would admit error, especially about his sick hero.
“I have already won the argument ten times over. you just need to admit it now. “
Only in your own mind.
Poop Deck,
you are to be congratulated on putting up, for so long, a fine effort at reason and rationality. Please don’t be frustrated at the intransigence of omer: he’s been programmed not to acknowledge anything critical of Islam, no matter what. It is his touchstone, his raison d’etre; his whole existence is founded on Koranic-based intellectual dishonesty. As I said, there’s no arguing with bigots, especially religious fanatics.
Moz
He *has* a mind?