Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 29, 2024 20:19:38 GMT
It is easy to understand why we were so easily tempted by other forums isnt it? We will never change ingrained malice but we don't have to take them seriously. When we tire of speaking knowledge to ignorance, fact to hate, we can just sit back and ignore them after privately laughing at them for a bit. And take solace from the fact that none of us matter anyway and the powers that be don't give a hoot what we think.. All I will say is that I'd rather have a Muslim for a neighbour than some of the people I find on the internet. lol It’s easy to understand why you and Zany are a joke in this one . Zany tries to excuse the paedophilia of Mohammad then posts a link that confirms that his paedophilia is part of the Islamic narrative . Zany didn’t prove that Muslims do not believe that their founder was a paedophile . He is trying to assert that they have got it all wrong and even if he was it isn’t relevant. Im not sure about you though , you just growl.😁 And you post random shit like this, informed more by ignorance than knowledge. And being laughed at by the ignorant and malicious is no bad thing. I'd be far more worried if they were taking us seriously |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Sept 29, 2024 20:21:54 GMT
You have to look at what the Sharia says and whether the Ulema are experts or not they make the Islamic law. No you don't. You have to look at what the countries' laws say. What Sharia says is as irrelevant as what the bible says. Except for those aspects of Sharia that are encoded in law because not all of it everywhere. So how about any actual law in any Muslim country today that supports your claim? The countries laws are just that what the laws state. I believed the discussion was as regards what Muslims believe and what their religion teaches. We know that in Islam for many it is believed that Mohammad followed a perfect life and therefore to live as Mohammad lived then that would be the perfect life. The final arbiter is how strict are Muslims in obeying the law when they have the power. We have numerous examples in places like Banda Aceh where child marriage is a recognised problem for the Indonesian government with many young girls being married early with all the psychological and reproductive problems that then fall on the state to deal with. Pakistan also has a significant problem with child marriages. |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Sept 29, 2024 20:23:19 GMT
It’s easy to understand why you and Zany are a joke in this one . Zany tries to excuse the paedophilia of Mohammad then posts a link that confirms that his paedophilia is part of the Islamic narrative . Zany didn’t prove that Muslims do not believe that their founder was a paedophile . He is trying to assert that they have got it all wrong and even if he was it isn’t relevant. Im not sure about you though , you just growl.😁 And you post random shit like this, informed more by ignorance than knowledge. And being laughed at by the ignorant and malicious is no bad thing. I'd be far more worried if they were taking us seriously It’s not random unless you are a moron , it’s not malicious unless you are a virtue signalling moron and it’s not ignorant unless you are too stupid to understand it . Not looking good for you is it? |
|
|
|
Post by ProVeritas on Sept 29, 2024 20:25:25 GMT
You cannot reason with hate when it is allied with stupidity. I expect he'll drag up some quote from an extremist or ancient text rather than any actual law. And I doubt very much which country's laws he will be referencing. If you are going to post on a political forum, then you need to know facts, otherwise you come across as being a dumb, now I am going to post this one last time, you have every opportunity to Google it, fact check it with any souse you desire, but it will come up with following results. ...
What is the age of sexual maturity in Islam?
The minimum age of puberty for girls is approximately 9 lunar years and if absence of no symptoms are found, it can be considered as approximately 15 lunar years to maximum 17 lunar years or 18 lunar years, or may vary by geographical region in case of
If the male penetrates and harms the girl, he should be held financially liable for her whole life. This is mentioned in Tahreer al-Waseelah, vol. 2, pages 221-222. As Ayatollah Khomeini says, it is not permissible to have intercourse before the age of nine, whether in nikah (permanent marriage) or temporary marriage
Now FUCK OFF and fact check the FACTS ^^ or we will just conclude you know fuck all about Muslims and their culture and Religion.
I think they are pointing out that "Islam" is NOT a country. And it is easy to show that age of consent varies, even across "Arab countries". Of course, perhaps some of you are over-looking that in Germany the Age Of Consent is 14, far lower than some Arab states. All The Best |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Sept 29, 2024 21:24:35 GMT
No they don't - Proboards is owned by an American company based in America. Hence they have to comply with American Law. It is your decision to access a foreign website - it is not Proboards duty to ensure that their content complies with the Laws of the other 194 countries outside of the USA. Well to test that utterly fucking stupid theory post something illegal. It won't be American Cops who come for you, it will be the UK Plod. All The Best Exactly - you finally understand. The cops come for you - not Proboards. Well done. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Sept 29, 2024 21:27:24 GMT
So you are playing the moral relativism card. So, by that token, historical slavery was perfectly fine, because everyone was doing it, and there is therefore no need for reparations? I have an issue with the "marrying to protect as there was no other protection for orphans" bullshit; adoption would clearly be the more effective and less problematic route there, and there are clear guidelines for adoption in Islamic culture, going back to the founding of Islam . But there is still the very real major issue of consummating a marriage with a 9 year old girl. Some girls at 9 years old would be going through puberty, but it would be almost unheard of (except the very rare cases of precocious puberty) for a 9 year old to be post-pubescent (meaning biologically sexually mature). So there is no "biological imperative" to be consummating a marriage with a 9 year old. All The Best I will leave that bit Here's what the experts think. newlinesmag.com/essays/oxford-study-sheds-light-on-muhammad-underage-wife-aisha/At this time they live by very different rules to back then. LOL - that excuse does not work when used to explain aspects of the British Empire. Then everything is judged by the standards of today. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Sept 29, 2024 21:38:49 GMT
So you are playing the moral relativism card. So, by that token, historical slavery was perfectly fine, because everyone was doing it, and there is therefore no need for reparations? I have an issue with the "marrying to protect as there was no other protection for orphans" bullshit; adoption would clearly be the more effective and less problematic route there, and there are clear guidelines for adoption in Islamic culture, going back to the founding of Islam . But there is still the very real major issue of consummating a marriage with a 9 year old girl. Some girls at 9 years old would be going through puberty, but it would be almost unheard of (except the very rare cases of precocious puberty) for a 9 year old to be post-pubescent (meaning biologically sexually mature). So there is no "biological imperative" to be consummating a marriage with a 9 year old. All The Best I will leave that bit Here's what the experts think. newlinesmag.com/essays/oxford-study-sheds-light-on-muhammad-underage-wife-aisha/At this time they live by very different rules to back then. Well it's not 'experts' - it is one expert. And here is a Muslim guy refuting his arguments against the Hadiths.. |
|
|
|
Post by Rebirth on Sept 30, 2024 6:04:26 GMT
This is what the Labour party stand for today? To not only make it illegal not to like Islam, but also associate not liking Islam with a mental disorder? Blimey, I know the old Communist regimes were mental, but damn, I can't see many people insisting that this should become law.
Still, at least there's one less Islamist in the Tory party.
As for not liking Wahhabism, ISIS, al-Qaeda or the Muslim Brotherhood, which are all political forces (Islamism) then I guess most of the country will be going to prison.
Firstly, I am not a member of or supporter of the current Labour Party. And I did not vote Labour in the general election. So on what basis you assume me to be a spokesman for Labour escapes me, unless you have imagined it. But even I know that the nonsense you have spouted is not at all what Labour stands for, least not in this universe. The parallel one you seem to inhabit is not one I wish to visit. Intelligent debate is only really possible when dealing in fact, not fiction. Far from being in the pockets of Muslims, Labour is losing Muslim voters hand over fist for being too pro-Israel. Hidden amongst all their gains was the fact that they lost 5 seats to pro-Gaza Independents, largely voted for by Muslims in opposition to Labour. But I am guessing that didn't actually happen in your universe. All I remember of you was the fact that you were posting threads on Montegriffo and Zanygame's site telling the world that you're trolling this site. If you want to go off on a tangent in an attempt to pass yourself off as intelligent then I will just assume you're trolling again. For the record, it was the Labour party that was considering the Islamist definition of Islamophobia despite opposition from free speech advocates. Obviously this was done to try and win over votes from anti-free-speech Islamists, which may have helped Labour get to the whopping 20% of the population's support, much of which is now full of regret. |
|
|
|
Post by Pacifico on Sept 30, 2024 6:54:15 GMT
Seems that defining Islamaphobia is not as easy as some people may think..
|
|
|
|
Post by Hutchyns on Sept 30, 2024 10:41:30 GMT
Sayeeda was always half decent looking, especially a few decades ago. I wonder if I'm the only one who remembers that The Sun often used to refer to her as Sayeeda Phwoarsi ? Anyway, that's my intellectual contribution to this thread on a wet Monday morning.  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2024 12:03:12 GMT
No you don't. You have to look at what the countries' laws say. What Sharia says is as irrelevant as what the bible says. Except for those aspects of Sharia that are encoded in law because not all of it everywhere. So how about any actual law in any Muslim country today that supports your claim? The countries laws are just that what the laws state. I believed the discussion was as regards what Muslims believe and what their religion teaches. We know that in Islam for many it is believed that Mohammad followed a perfect life and therefore to live as Mohammad lived then that would be the perfect life. The final arbiter is how strict are Muslims in obeying the law when they have the power. We have numerous examples in places like Banda Aceh where child marriage is a recognised problem for the Indonesian government with many young girls being married early with all the psychological and reproductive problems that then fall on the state to deal with. Pakistan also has a significant problem with child marriages. It is a reasonable point that you are making, that ancient religions often provide very different norms of what is acceptable compared with modern legal codes. This is as true of Christianity and Christian countries as it is of Islam and Muslim ones. The bible for example would have us believe that adulterers should be stoned to death. that the daughters of priests should be burned alive in furnaces if they become prostitutes, that anyone who disrespects the sabbath should be beaten with rods, and that you should be put to death simply for dishonouring your parents, ie biblical sanction for honour killings. Of course no legal code in any Christian country today incorporates any of this into law. So what Islam actually says is irrelevant to modern laws in Muslim countries, unless those laws literally follow Koranic pronouncements. In most they rarely do except to some extent in extremist theocratic regimes and even here the adoption of the Sharia literally is less than total in most cases. And the refugees fleeing such regimes are likely to be fleeing from such extremism rather than as supporters of it. The more closely any regime adheres to ancient texts the more brutal and medieval it appears to be, the ultimate recent example being Islamic State. No Christian country today adheres so closely to ancient religious texts. Back when they did, burning witches and heretics alive was considered normal and righteous. So what matters today is not what Islamic teaching said in ancient times, but how that is interpreted for the modern era. And I think anyone would struggle to find a Muslim country's legal code with a legal age of consent at 9 years old. And if any such law today exists anywhere, it would be in some hell hole run by theocratic nutjobs and not in most mainstream Muslim countries.. If you have evidence of such a law in the legal codes of any Muslim nation today, by all means post a link to that evidence. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2024 12:09:59 GMT
And you post random shit like this, informed more by ignorance than knowledge. And being laughed at by the ignorant and malicious is no bad thing. I'd be far more worried if they were taking us seriously It’s not random unless you are a moron , it’s not malicious unless you are a virtue signalling moron and it’s not ignorant unless you are too stupid to understand it . Not looking good for you is it? And calling people morons for want of a more intelligent response is working for you? Still, if it makes you happy, its all good. Nothing we say actually matters anyway |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2024 12:16:48 GMT
Firstly, I am not a member of or supporter of the current Labour Party. And I did not vote Labour in the general election. So on what basis you assume me to be a spokesman for Labour escapes me, unless you have imagined it. But even I know that the nonsense you have spouted is not at all what Labour stands for, least not in this universe. The parallel one you seem to inhabit is not one I wish to visit. Intelligent debate is only really possible when dealing in fact, not fiction. Far from being in the pockets of Muslims, Labour is losing Muslim voters hand over fist for being too pro-Israel. Hidden amongst all their gains was the fact that they lost 5 seats to pro-Gaza Independents, largely voted for by Muslims in opposition to Labour. But I am guessing that didn't actually happen in your universe. All I remember of you was the fact that you were posting threads on Montegriffo and Zanygame's site telling the world that you're trolling this site. If you want to go off on a tangent in an attempt to pass yourself off as intelligent then I will just assume you're trolling again. For the record, it was the Labour party that was considering the Islamist definition of Islamophobia despite opposition from free speech advocates. Obviously this was done to try and win over votes from anti-free-speech Islamists, which may have helped Labour get to the whopping 20% of the population's support, much of which is now full of regret. What is the difference between adopting a Jewish definition of antisemitism and an Islamic definition of Islamophobia? Is it perhaps that you hate one and not the other?. And if you believe that an intelligent response citing such pesky things as facts is trolling just because you don't like it, that's tough shit I'm afraid. |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Sept 30, 2024 12:20:04 GMT
It’s not random unless you are a moron , it’s not malicious unless you are a virtue signalling moron and it’s not ignorant unless you are too stupid to understand it . Not looking good for you is it? And calling people morons for want of a more intelligent response is working for you? Still, if it makes you happy, it’s all good. Nothing we say actually matters anyway No . I’m calling you a moron for posting a moronic post and pointing out why you are a moron. You’re welcome . |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 30, 2024 12:26:22 GMT
And calling people morons for want of a more intelligent response is working for you? Still, if it makes you happy, it’s all good. Nothing we say actually matters anyway No . I’m calling you a moron for posting a moronic post and pointing out why you are a moron. You’re welcome . I see that the standard of your arguments is as high as ever. lol |
|
