Doubles standards

[JakeStarkey]

pedophilia - definition of pedophilia in the Medical dictionary - by the Free Online Medical Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia.

pedophilia /pe·do·phil·ia/ (-fil´e-ah) a paraphilia in which an adult has recurrent, intense sexual urges or sexually arousing fantasies of engaging or repeatedly engages in sexual activity with a prepubertal child.pedophil´ic

A comparative example is Joseph Smith. Joseph Smith has been wrongly accused of pedophilia. He has been accused and did probably have sexual intercourse, however, with 14 year old females. In Sacred Loneliness: The Plural Wives of Joseph Smith (Signature Books, 1997) is a good study of this. A more generous (to Smith) narrative can be found in the Brian Hales recently released works: Joseph Smith’s Polygamy, 3 volumes.

I agree that we cannot judge the past by today's standards, but as I said before, at 9 Aisha was too young by even the Bedouin standards of the day.

Once again, and I say this nicely, your opinion adds nothing to the discussion. I am not a scholar of Islam, so here is another account:

Determination of the true age of Aisha

It appears that Maulana Muhammad Ali was the first Islamic scholar directly to challenge the notion that Aisha was aged six and nine, respectively, at the time of her nikah and consummation of marriage. This he did in, at least, the following writings: his English booklet Prophet of Islam, his larger English book Muhammad, the Prophet, and in the footnotes in his voluminous Urdu translation and commentary of Sahih Bukhari entitled Fadl-ul-Bari, these three writings being published in the 1920s and 1930s. In the booklet Prophet of Islam, which was later incorporated in 1948 as the first chapter of his book Living Thoughts of the Prophet Muhammad, he writes in a lengthy footnote as follows:

“A great misconception prevails as to the age at which Aisha was taken in marriage by the Prophet. Ibn Sa‘d has stated in the Tabaqat that when Abu Bakr [father of Aisha] was approached on behalf of the Holy Prophet, he replied that the girl had already been betrothed to Jubair, and that he would have to settle the matter first with him. This shows that Aisha must have been approaching majority at the time. Again, the Isaba, speaking of the Prophet’s daughter Fatima, says that she was born five years before the Call and was about five years older than Aisha. This shows that Aisha must have been about ten years at the time of her betrothal to the Prophet, and not six years as she is generally supposed to be. This is further borne out by the fact that Aisha herself is reported to have stated that when the chapter [of the Holy Quran] entitled The Moon, the fifty-fourth chapter, was revealed, she was a girl playing about and remembered certain verses then revealed. Now the fifty-fourth chapter was undoubtedly revealed before the sixth year of the Call. All these considerations point to but one conclusion, viz., that Aisha could not have been less than ten years of age at the time of her nikah, which was virtually only a betrothal. And there is one report in the Tabaqat that Aisha was nine years of age at the time of nikah. Again it is a fact admitted on all hands that the nikah of Aisha took place in the tenth year of the Call in the month of Shawwal, while there is also preponderance of evidence as to the consummation of her marriage taking place in the second year of Hijra in the same month, which shows that full five years had elapsed between the nikah and the consummation. Hence there is not the least doubt that Aisha was at least nine or ten years of age at the time of betrothal, and fourteen or fifteen years at the time of marriage.” [4] (Bolding is mine.)

Age of Aisha (ra) at time of marriage

 

[legaleagle_45]

The primary distinction as I see it is that on the one hand we are talking about the leader of the Islam religion in the instance of Muhammad. On the other hand we are talking about the step father of Jesus, who, according to Catholic tradition, never layed a hand on Mary who died a virgin.... so the pedophile tag sticks to Muhammad by everyones admission but has not applicability whatsoever to Jesus and even the step dad of Jesus has what is known as plausable denial. (OK, maybe implausable denial, but denial nonetheless... No fair to bring up Mary Magdalene now as it would just confuse people)

 

[Avatar4321]

BTW in our culture, there seems to be a trend in calling anyone over the age of 18 who has sex with someone under the age of 18 a pedofile. This just isn't accurate. We should not throw that label around.

Also agreed, but when a 57 yo boinks (rapes) a 9 yo there is no gray area.

Who said there was? There isnt a jury in the world that would convict Mohommad with the weak evidence there is.

 

[Avatar4321]

The primary distinction as I see it is that on the one hand we are talking about the leader of the Islam religion in the instance of Muhammad. On the other hand we are talking about the step father of Jesus, who, according to Catholic tradition, never layed a hand on Mary who died a virgin.... so the pedophile tag sticks to Muhammad by everyones admission but has not applicability whatsoever to Jesus and even the step dad of Jesus has what is known as plausable denial. (OK, maybe implausable denial, but denial nonetheless... No fair to bring up Mary Magdalene now as it would just confuse people)

That's the primary distiction? what board are you reading? I dont see a single person making that argument.

And there is no reason to bring up Mary MAgdalene because she is irrelevant to the conversation.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Very simple. Why do people discount Muhammad's relationship with a younger girl by labeling him a pedophile and not Joseph? Joseph was said to be in his 30's and and Mary (mother of Jesus) to be 13-14. Why do you guys talk about Muhammad and not Joseph who was such a desperate Jew he could only get a female that was between 13 and 14 years of age?

I thought the story went that Joseph didn't have sex with Mary.

It was God who was the pederast not Joseph.

And since Muslims and Christians supposedly worship the same god then they both worship a child molester.

 

[legaleagle_45]

The primary distinction as I see it is that on the one hand we are talking about the leader of the Islam religion in the instance of Muhammad. On the other hand we are talking about the step father of Jesus, who, according to Catholic tradition, never layed a hand on Mary who died a virgin.... so the pedophile tag sticks to Muhammad by everyones admission but has not applicability whatsoever to Jesus and even the step dad of Jesus has what is known as plausable denial. (OK, maybe implausable denial, but denial nonetheless... No fair to bring up Mary Magdalene now as it would just confuse people)

That's the primary distiction? what board are you reading? I dont see a single person making that argument.

And there is no reason to bring up Mary MAgdalene because she is irrelevant to the conversation.

It is the distinction I am making. One allegation concerns the leader of the religion while the other involves the stepfather of the leader of the religion... a real substantive distinction in my opinion. And the Mary MAgdalene reference was inserted for purposes of levity.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The primary distinction as I see it is that on the one hand we are talking about the leader of the Islam religion in the instance of Muhammad. On the other hand we are talking about the step father of Jesus, who, according to Catholic tradition, never layed a hand on Mary who died a virgin.... so the pedophile tag sticks to Muhammad by everyones admission but has not applicability whatsoever to Jesus and even the step dad of Jesus has what is known as plausable denial. (OK, maybe implausable denial, but denial nonetheless... No fair to bring up Mary Magdalene now as it would just confuse people)

That's the primary distiction? what board are you reading? I dont see a single person making that argument.

And there is no reason to bring up Mary MAgdalene because she is irrelevant to the conversation.

It is the distinction I am making. One allegation concerns the leader of the religion while the other involves the stepfather of the leader of the religion... a real substantive distinction in my opinion. And the Mary MAgdalene reference was inserted for purposes of levity.

Your opinion remains irrelevant to the facts. Mohammed is safe from your judgment.

 

[legaleagle_45]

That's the primary distiction? what board are you reading? I dont see a single person making that argument.

And there is no reason to bring up Mary MAgdalene because she is irrelevant to the conversation.

It is the distinction I am making. One allegation concerns the leader of the religion while the other involves the stepfather of the leader of the religion... a real substantive distinction in my opinion. And the Mary MAgdalene reference was inserted for purposes of levity.

Your opinion remains irrelevant to the facts. Mohammed is safe from your judgment.

And what facts would those be?

 

[JakeStarkey]

It is the distinction I am making. One allegation concerns the leader of the religion while the other involves the stepfather of the leader of the religion... a real substantive distinction in my opinion. And the Mary MAgdalene reference was inserted for purposes of levity.

Your opinion remains irrelevant to the facts. Mohammed is safe from your judgment.

And what facts would those be?

This has been discussed already above, so, no, we are not going beyond that you have an opinion only, no facts.

 

[Avatar4321]

It is the distinction I am making. One allegation concerns the leader of the religion while the other involves the stepfather of the leader of the religion... a real substantive distinction in my opinion. And the Mary MAgdalene reference was inserted for purposes of levity.

Your opinion remains irrelevant to the facts. Mohammed is safe from your judgment.

And what facts would those be?

Im guessing he is referring to the ones he has already posted in this thread. The ones no one has even tried to disprove.

 

[Hollie]

Very simple. Why do people discount Muhammad's relationship with a younger girl by labeling him a pedophile and not Joseph? Joseph was said to be in his 30's and and Mary (mother of Jesus) to be 13-14. Why do you guys talk about Muhammad and not Joseph who was such a desperate Jew he could only get a female that was between 13 and 14 years of age?

Shouldn't we establish what the standard is before we ask about a double standard?

And considering we don't have accurate information on the ages of Mary or Joseph, how can we say someone is holding a double standard?

And quite honestly, Im not going to conclude that Muhammad was a pedophile, even if he was married to a young girl. Just because someone is married does not mean the relationship is consumated. In some eastern cultures, it was customary to marry them young and then not allow consumation till much later.

We are looking at information that at best is over 1000 years old. It's difficult to confirm the accuracy or determine what information comes from the time period and whats a later fabrication. Or determine whether the sources are reliable.

Regardless, the worth of the message preached isnt determined by the goodness of all the participants. Especially since only one person could ever be considered truly Good.

Did you realize that you offered a rather damning indictment of your own religion regarding your comments in connection with: “We are looking at information that at best is over 1000 years old. It's difficult to confirm the accuracy or determine what information comes from the time period and whats a later fabrication. Or determine whether the sources are reliable.”

If you step back and objectively observe the comparison, you will see that your denigration of islam and its lack of historical accuracy applies equally to Christianity. You’re simply applying special pleadings in favor of your religious beliefs. Despite clear evidence of various religions building themselves up via legend building and despite clear examples of people who are alive today who culling the gullible, you exempt Christianity from such legend building.

You do so because you desire to believe in it, and will not apply the strictures of true knowledge to the claims. So every evidence that comes along that truly dismantles your belief system, you must reject and escape into the special pleading loophole.

It's nothing special to look at the OT and write an account of some someone's life that embraces those aspects you want to develop as "fulfilled prophecy". It's especially easy to do it if you wait some 30-40 years after the events to do it!

 

[legaleagle_45]

Your opinion remains irrelevant to the facts. Mohammed is safe from your judgment.

And what facts would those be?

This has been discussed already above, so, no, we are not going beyond that you have an opinion only, no facts.

My only opinion is that Muhammed is the leader of Islam and Joseph is not the leader of Christianity. As such, the allegations against Muhammed are of greater import to Islam than the allegations against Joseph are to Christianity.

If you disagree with that analysis, please explain why.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Your opinion remains irrelevant to the facts. Mohammed is safe from your judgment.

And what facts would those be?

Im guessing he is referring to the ones he has already posted in this thread. The ones no one has even tried to disprove.

I wish someone would post facts about Mohammed so we can discuss them. All we have from the "hate Mohammed crowd" is opinion.

The issue of Joseph and Mary has nothing to do with Mohammed.

 

[Avatar4321]

And what facts would those be?

Im guessing he is referring to the ones he has already posted in this thread. The ones no one has even tried to disprove.

I wish someone would post facts about Mohammed so we can discuss them. All we have from the "hate Mohammed crowd" is opinion.

The issue of Joseph and Mary has nothing to do with Mohammed.

And there really isnt any double standard no matter how anyone looks at it here.

Is there a single person here who thinks that if there was evidence someone raped a 9 year old it would be permissible in any circumstances?

 

[legaleagle_45]

And what facts would those be?

Im guessing he is referring to the ones he has already posted in this thread. The ones no one has even tried to disprove.

I wish someone would post facts about Mohammed so we can discuss them. All we have from the "hate Mohammed crowd" is opinion.

The issue of Joseph and Mary has nothing to do with Mohammed.

Then you are debating the wrong guy as I am not part of the "hate Mohammed crowd". My facts are that Mohammend is the leader of Islam and Joseph is not the leader of Christianity. Do you dispute those facts?

 

[JakeStarkey]

I don't dispute "Mohammend is the leader of Islam and Joseph is not the leader of Christianity".

Which has nothing to do with pedophilia, though some how I think you will try to drag it in. Show me I am wrong, please.

 

[Againsheila]

The primary distinction as I see it is that on the one hand we are talking about the leader of the Islam religion in the instance of Muhammad. On the other hand we are talking about the step father of Jesus, who, according to Catholic tradition, never layed a hand on Mary who died a virgin.... so the pedophile tag sticks to Muhammad by everyones admission but has not applicability whatsoever to Jesus and even the step dad of Jesus has what is known as plausable denial. (OK, maybe implausable denial, but denial nonetheless... No fair to bring up Mary Magdalene now as it would just confuse people)

That's the primary distiction? what board are you reading? I dont see a single person making that argument.

And there is no reason to bring up Mary MAgdalene because she is irrelevant to the conversation.

I don't have to make that argument, it's already been made for me. At the very least, Joseph didn't have sex with Mary until after Jesus was born and some say he never had sex with her, he had children by a previous marriage.

As for Mohamed...didn't he covet his son's wife? didn't he arrange for his son's marriage to be terminated and then take his son's bride as his own?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Opinions are not facts, Againsheila.

 

[Avatar4321]

Very simple. Why do people discount Muhammad's relationship with a younger girl by labeling him a pedophile and not Joseph? Joseph was said to be in his 30's and and Mary (mother of Jesus) to be 13-14. Why do you guys talk about Muhammad and not Joseph who was such a desperate Jew he could only get a female that was between 13 and 14 years of age?

Shouldn't we establish what the standard is before we ask about a double standard?

And considering we don't have accurate information on the ages of Mary or Joseph, how can we say someone is holding a double standard?

And quite honestly, Im not going to conclude that Muhammad was a pedophile, even if he was married to a young girl. Just because someone is married does not mean the relationship is consumated. In some eastern cultures, it was customary to marry them young and then not allow consumation till much later.

We are looking at information that at best is over 1000 years old. It's difficult to confirm the accuracy or determine what information comes from the time period and whats a later fabrication. Or determine whether the sources are reliable.

Regardless, the worth of the message preached isnt determined by the goodness of all the participants. Especially since only one person could ever be considered truly Good.

Did you realize that you offered a rather damning indictment of your own religion regarding your comments in connection with: “We are looking at information that at best is over 1000 years old. It's difficult to confirm the accuracy or determine what information comes from the time period and whats a later fabrication. Or determine whether the sources are reliable.”

If you step back and objectively observe the comparison, you will see that your denigration of islam and its lack of historical accuracy applies equally to Christianity. You’re simply applying special pleadings in favor of your religious beliefs. Despite clear evidence of various religions building themselves up via legend building and despite clear examples of people who are alive today who culling the gullible, you exempt Christianity from such legend building.

You do so because you desire to believe in it, and will not apply the strictures of true knowledge to the claims. So every evidence that comes along that truly dismantles your belief system, you must reject and escape into the special pleading loophole.

It's nothing special to look at the OT and write an account of some someone's life that embraces those aspects you want to develop as "fulfilled prophecy". It's especially easy to do it if you wait some 30-40 years after the events to do it!

Denigration of Islam? Im defending Mohammad. Are you even bothering to read what I write?

 

[JakeStarkey]

Nope, Hollie is being defensive and not reading carefully.

Hollie, we are talking about Mohammed. The facts are not conclusive about any sort of pedophilia between him and a young girl. Quite the opposite.