• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Is the muslim phophet Muhammed a pedophile?

Is the muslim phophet Muhammed a pedophile?

  • Total voters
    31
jamesrage

jamesrage

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
36,705
Reaction score
17,867
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
I say yes. I am sure some will say back then girls were married off as young as twelve years old, the key words here is twelve years old not nine years old.So their point is null.

Muhammed - The Pedophile
Volume 7, Book 62, Number 64: Sahih Bukhari Aisha: that the Prophet married her when she was six
years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with
him for nine years (i.e. till his death).
 
Last edited:
I think I've seen similar threads like this several times over the years at DP.

My position? Pedophile can refer to both a legal term and a psychological term. In today's society, legally, absolutely. Psychologically, hard to tell. In the society of his time? I'm not sure if I've read anything that indicated that folks during his time saw this behavior as pedoophilic. If so, then absolutely.
 
Reminder: March 20th is the official "Everybody Draw Muhammad Day" according to Facebook.
 
jamesrage said:
I say yes. I am sure some will say back then girls were married off as young as twelve years old, the key words here is twelve years old not nine years old.So their point is null.

Muhammed - The Pedophile
Volume 7, Book 62, Number 64: Sahih Bukhari Aisha: that the Prophet married her when she was six
years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with
him for nine years (i.e. till his death).
Click to expand...

Would a pedophile marry someone older than them (by 25 years)?

Why didn't Aisha's parents object to the marriage, if they honestly believed she was too little?

Why didn't any of the Meccans (like Abu Lahab) who persecuted Muhammad use his marriage to a little girl against him?

Another thing to remember is that during pre-Islamic Arabia, infanticide was practiced regularly. Daughters would be buried (alive at times) by their parents solely because they were female.
 
I suspect it is more an issue of culture than a moral consideration. As far as I know, women are still considered little more than possessions in much of the region where Islam is the dominant religion.
 
jamesrage said:
I say yes. I am sure some will say back then girls were married off as young as twelve years old, the key words here is twelve years old not nine years old.So their point is null.

Muhammed - The Pedophile
Volume 7, Book 62, Number 64: Sahih Bukhari Aisha: that the Prophet married her when she was six
years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with
him for nine years (i.e. till his death).
Click to expand...

Applying modern morality to past ages is world-class stupid.

Nymphetamine said:
Reminder: March 20th is the official "Everybody Draw Muhammad Day" according to Facebook.
Click to expand...
That's...kinda dumb. Disagreeing with a religion is fine, but going out of the way to try to be irritating and offensive is pretty stupid. I dont really see the point.
 
Last edited:
Hoplite said:
Applying modern morality to past ages is world-class stupid.
Click to expand...

Just as is applying past age morality to modern times, ie no sex before marriage.

Hoplite said:
That's...kinda dumb. Disagreeing with a religion is fine, but going out of the way to try to be irritating and offensive is pretty stupid. I dont really see the point.
Click to expand...

It's not about that. It's about freedom of speech. You see, this cartoonist in Sweden, Lars Vilks, made a comic depicting Muhammad as a dog, then was promptly assaulted. Later on, Islamic radicals also attempted to set fire to his house, sent him death threats, left a knife on his doorstep, etc. It's protest, not slander.
 
Hoplite said:
Applying modern morality to past ages is world-class stupid.
Click to expand...
Not really, especially in this case since in the years before he consummated he would "thigh" her and get off that way.

The man was a sicko no matter how you look at it.
 
Southern Man said:
Not really, especially in this case since in the years before he consummated he would "thigh" her and get off that way.

The man was a sicko no matter how you look at it.
Click to expand...

People are a product of their times, and there is nothing wrong with that.
 
Southern Man said:
Was "thighing" a girl that age common practice?

Of course it wasn't. Mohamed got away with it because he'd kill anyone who complained.
Click to expand...

Ohhhh. I was confused because it went from modern morality being applied to past actions to thighing.
 
I don't believe that anyone, in any culture, in any time, who thought that having sex with a 9 year old is normal was "right."
 
Hoplite said:
Applying modern morality to past ages is world-class stupid.


.
Click to expand...

If that is world class stupid, just imagine the degree of idiocy required to justify present day attitudes by referring back to these ancient times.

I can think of nothing less intelligent than mindless apologia, myself.
 
jamesrage said:
I say yes. I am sure some will say back then girls were married off as young as twelve years old, the key words here is twelve years old not nine years old.So their point is null.

Muhammed - The Pedophile
Volume 7, Book 62, Number 64: Sahih Bukhari Aisha: that the Prophet married her when she was six
years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with
him for nine years (i.e. till his death).
Click to expand...


Aisha was what we would consider too young for marriage, although it wasn't atypical for the time period. She became a leading woman in Islam and even a damn good military general who fought the Caliphs once Muhammad died.

I mean sure you can spend time being grossed by the pedophilia of the past, but I'd much rather spend time learning about her accomplishments.
 
Gardener said:
If that is world class stupid, just imagine the degree of idiocy required to justify present day attitudes by referring back to these ancient times.

I can think of nothing less intelligent than mindless apologia, myself.
Click to expand...

What is the cut off age? Where referring back no longer is cool and becomes mindless apologia?
 
Catz Part Deux said:
I don't believe that anyone, in any culture, in any time, who thought that having sex with a 9 year old is normal was "right."
Click to expand...

i believe that back in the olden days, the right age to **** a girl was when she had her first period, so if the girl had got it when she was nine, it would have been socially acceptable
 
Arch Enemy said:
What is the cut off age? Where referring back no longer is cool and becomes mindless apologia?
Click to expand...

Referring to ANY past age in order to justify victimization is an act of apologia. It is apologia since the very argument is built around the preconceived notion that one sets the position first and then works one's arguments back from that point, resorting to the inevitable double standards born of moral relativism in order to do so.
 
Gardener said:
Referring to ANY past age in order to justify victimization is an act of apologia. It is apologia since the very argument is built around the preconceived notion that one sets the position first and then works one's arguments back from that point, resorting to the inevitable double standards born of moral relativism in order to do so.
Click to expand...

How about the reverse of that. What if I justify victimization by referring to the future, for which I have seen.
 
Arch Enemy said:
How about the reverse of that. What if I justify victimization by referring to the future, for which I have seen.
Click to expand...

The fact that you would ask that displays that you really do not grasp the concept.
 
Catz Part Deux said:
I don't believe that anyone, in any culture, in any time, who thought that having sex with a 9 year old is normal was "right."
Click to expand...

True, but if women are revered as no more than possessions, "right" doesn't fit into the equation. It's like trying to apply moral standards to the treatment of pets or material possessions.
 
lizzie said:
True, but if women are revered as no more than possessions, "right" doesn't fit into the equation. It's like trying to apply moral standards to the treatment of pets or material possessions.
Click to expand...

True. Were they allowed to fornicate their goats and camels at age 9? If not, then goats and camels were treated better, on a relative scale, than girls. I hate to use the term women here, because a 9 year old girl is not a woman by any standard.
 
I say you've gotta lock that **** down while they're still tight.
 
Catz Part Deux said:
I hate to use the term women here, because a 9 year old girl is not a woman by any standard.
Click to expand...

Yeah, I realize that, but I'm just referring to female status rather than the age of sexual maturity. I know lots of 20 and 30-yr old women who are psychologically and emotionally children.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom