The Instigator
ashraff
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
ade2likes
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

Muhammad raped Aisha

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/30/2015 Category: Religion
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 680 times Debate No: 83241
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)

 

ashraff

Con

If a rapist is said to be a prophet of God,that is nothing but IRONY.it is a widespread rumour that prophet muhammad[s.a.w] is a terrorist,which i believe he is not.

*.The pro must be able to tell us how the prophet was a rapist.

*the pro's points should be void of hatred and hypocrisy,but with reasonable points.

* allegations that wont be supported by evidence should not be brought up

*straw man fallacy is welcomed

*FIRST ROUND IS ACCEPTANCE
* it is a fact that Quran is the holy book of Islam and bible for Christians. the authentic hadiths are ones respected by Muslims.

Looking forward to an interesting argument and voting should be unbias nor sentimental
ade2likes

Pro

Definition of a Rapist

Varieties of dictionary definitions of rape make one theme obvious: A rapist is someone who forces another person to have sexual intercourse. Rape is the crime of taking carnal advantage of another person to submit to sexual intercourse without CONSENT

I would also add that rape includes having sex with minors or mentally disabled persons. Muhammad married Aisha when she was six and had sex with her when she was nine years old. An adult having sex with a nine year old is a rape, children at such tender age are not emotionally and psychologically mature enough to have sex. So, Muhammad"s having sex with young Aisha qualifies as rape.

I am accusing Muhammad of rape. According to most sources Aisha was prepurbescent at the time her marriage was consummated, or at the most would've just started puberty. I don't imagine that a 9 year old girl knows much about sex, or desires it, even in today's highly sexualized society, much less so in 7th century Arabia. As a result, a man seeking to enjoy his young bride, would have to force himself upon her. The girl wouldn't even know what is being done to her until she is old enough to understand sex, and actually develop desire for it, and consent to it. Hence Muhammad raped Aisha.

The thought of an old man becoming aroused by a child is one of the most disturbing thoughts that makes us cringe as it reminds us of pedophilia and the most despicable people. It is difficult to accept that the Prophet married Aisha when she was 6-years-old and consummated his marriage with her when she was 9. He was then, 54 years old.

The Sahih Ahadith confirms Aisha was a minor Muhammad married her:

Sahih Muslim Book 008, Number 3310:
'A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported: Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) married me when I was six years old, and I was admitted to his house when I was nine years old.

Sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 64
Narrated '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).

It is very clear Aisha was a minor who knew nothing about sex. Let us look at how terrified the little girl was on seeing Muhammad pulling down her pant:

Sahih Al-Bukhari HadithHadith 5.234

Narrated Aisha:
The Prophet engaged me when I was a girl of six (years). We went to Medina and stayed at the home of Bani-al-Harith bin Khazraj. Then I got ill and my hair fell down.

Later on my hair grew (again) and my mother, Um Ruman, came to me while I was playing in a swing with some of my girl friends. She called me, and I went to her, not knowing what she wanted to do to me. She caught me by the hand and made me stand at the door of the house. I was breathless then, and when my breathing became all right, she took some water and rubbed my face and head with it. Then she took me into the house. There in the house I saw some Ansari women who said, "Best wishes and Allah's Blessing and a good luck." Then she entrusted me to them and they prepared me (for the marriage).

Unexpectedly Allah's Apostle came to me in the forenoon and my mother handed me over to him, and at that time I was a girl of nine years of age.

It is NOT unreasonable to assume that Aisha's hair fell because of the TRAUMA of being married to Muhammad of 54 years, equal in age to her father. Con should probably tell us why Aisha hair fell.

The above report from her mouth, shows a bewildered and frightened little girl who was given to a much older man for sex.

To call Muhammad's intercourse 'consummation of marriage' is a diabolical misrepresentation of reality and morality. Aisha, a little girl, was RAPED by Muhammad since there was no CONSENT on her part.

It should also be pointed out that Aisha was not able to bare any children to Muhammad. Here too, one can assume that her reproductive system may have been damaged when Muhammad penetrated her especially if she had not yet reached puberty

The Con should also tell us if Aisha was consented before being given Muhammad for marriage. Since there was no consent on her part what should we call such marriage? Is it not rape? The only way Muhammad won't be guilty of rape is when the Con can produce an evidence of Aisha consent. In fact Muhammad is guilty of three count charges here: Rape, Child Abuse and Pedophilia.

Even Abu Bakr the greatest fool in the world was shocked when Muhammad requested for Aisha's hand in marriage:

Narrated Ursa
The Prophet asked Abu Bakr for 'Aisha's hand in marriage. Abu Bakr said "But I am your brother." The Prophet said,
"You are my brother in Allah's religion and His Book, but she (Aisha) is lawful for me to marry." sahih Al-Bukhari Hadith

Abu Bakr was so shocked at Muhammad's proposal to marry the child Aisha of six years that he told him 'but I am your brother' meaning that it should not be permissible as if it were incestuous.

This word 'but' brings out the true disbelief of Abu Bakr regarding the request, which of course turrned out to be an unchallengeable demand. Muhammad after all was of a similar age to Abu Bakr.

Unfortunately, Abu Bakr, like all the other gullible, superstitious and frightened followers of Muhammad, actually believed that he was the messenger of Allah and was totally petrified to go against his wishes or demands.

Even a pagan like Abu Bakr found it unseemly if not offensive to expect and allow a child girl to have sexual intercourse with a man, especially one who was already over fifty years old.

His shock alone is evidence that is what Muhammad was demanding was against the social norms of even the pagans.

Muhammad had his fantasies and was able to fulfill each and every one of them by introducing an alleged 'divine' verse justifying each and every one of his requirements.

In this manner, with 'Allah' always and very conveniently at his beck and call, Muhammad was able to justify all his actions, deeds, misdeeds and desires without any mere mortals being able to challenge the messenger of Allah.

The Con should demonstrate to us how Muhammad PEDOPHILIC relationship with Aisha was not a rape. I have proven beyond every reasonable doubts that Muhammad raped Aisha since there was no CONSENT on her part. Aisha is too young to be sexually molested. A 9 yr old is supposed to be cater for as a child not penetrated as a child bride.

It is unfortunate that billions of people worship and emulate this man. If this is not insanity what is?

I remain cordially yours

Regards!
Debate Round No. 1
ashraff

Con

I thought it was written in capital letters above that "FIRST ROUND IS ACCEPTANCE". firstly,my opponent failed to obey one of the rules of this debate, i expect more civility in the future

my opponent brought up some bogus definition of rape where he convinently sneaked in lies and corruption, i will present real definition of rape as presented by the encarta dictionary

rape [rayp]
noun (plural rapes)
1. forcing of somebody into sex: the crime of using force somebody to have sexual intercourse with somebody
2. instance of rape: an instance of the crime of rape
3. violent destructive treatment: the violent, destructive, or abusive treatment of something
the rape of a beautiful stretch of countryside

4. abduction: an act of seizing somebody and carrying him or her away by force (archaic)

transitive verb (past and past participle raped, present participle rap"ing, 3rd person present singular rapes)
1. force somebody to have sex: to force somebody to have sexual intercourse
2. violate something: to treat something in a violent, destructive, or abusive way
rape the land for its resources

Microsoft" Encarta" 2009.

contrary to the ignorance on fraud of my opponent, we can see clearly that there is nothing like " rape includes having sex with minors or mentally disabled persons.". here a fraud is noted as my opponent tries to win the argument to support muhammed raping aisha which is a fallacy. moreover, as we have read, rape does not happen under marital situations, as sex within this institution is not seen as forced or illegal. the definition alone fell his whole mouthing.

next my opponent tries to justify his insult with the age of aisha as at the time of consummation with the hadith (which i will deal with later under the law guiding the authenticity of hadiths). but the question is, 'what is his judgement bases?'. on which scale do you say something is right or something is wrong?

Aisha's parents were the ones who married her to our Prophet, and that no Muslim or even pagan objected to the marriage because it was widely practiced. And even until today in 3rd world countries (Muslims and non-Muslims), little girls as young as 9 or 10 do get married. Anyway, the reason no one objected was to the Prophet's marriage was.
http://www.answering-christianity.com......
1-The Bible's Prophets, and even Roman Emperors married girls as young as 8![ 1]
2-Mary got pregnant between the ages of 11 and 14.
3-The minimum age for marriage in the US-State of Delaware in year 1880 was 7
4-According to the Jewish Talmud, Prophet Moses and his followers had sex with girls as young as 3 years old.

i stand to be corrected on this facts. and by this i have established that the age that my opponent place his argument on does not count. many people sees it as normal. however, if this is not enough as a moral justification, since we are discussing religion then i will ask my opponent that to bring from his book, the age limit for marriage from his bible. the answer here is, there is none. if there is we wont have biblical prophets having sex with minors. example:

Moses
Numbers 31:17-18 "Now kill all the boys
[innocent kids]. And kill every woman who has
slept with a man, but save for yourselves
every girl who has never slept with a man. "
In the Torah (In the Book of Numbers in the
Bible), after the conquest of Midian and
Moab, and the great venereal plague, Moses
(peace be on him) ordered that all the
women "who have known a man" be killed
but that "all the young girls, who have not
known a man by lying with him" be kept
alive for the Israelites.
Since the only females left fit for marriage
and wholesome relations were prepubescent
virgins, a Jewish law concerning child
marriage was enacted. That law is found in
the Babylonian Talmud:
"Rabbi Joseph said, 'Come and hear. A
maiden aged 3 years and a day may be
acquired in marriage by coition.'
Mishnah: A girl of the age of 3 years and a
day may be betrothed, subject to her father's
approval, by sexual intercourse.
Gemara: Our Rabbis taught: 'A girl of the
age of 3 years may be betrothed by sexual
intercourse.' "

//Con should probably tell us why Aisha hair fell.//

how does this have anything to do with rape?

//It should also be pointed out that Aisha was not able to bare any children to Muhammad. Here too, one can assume that her reproductive system may have been damaged when Muhammad penetrated her especially if she had not yet reached puberty//

i dont think assumption counts in an intellectual and fact based debate

//Even Abu Bakr the greatest fool in the world was shocked when Muhammad requested for Aisha's hand in marriage://

name calling only make you look less balanced in your judgement.

my opponent in his bad mouthing after insulting abu bakr who is respected by muslims to get at me posted an hadiths to say abu bakr do not approve of her daugther's marriage. this is misleading.

REBUTTAL:
The pro wanted us to note the words of aisha's father but seems not to be concerned about the response of the prophet.this was the response of the prophet:
//The Prophet said, "You are my brother in Allah's religion and His Book, but she (Aisha) is lawful for me to marry."//

Here the prophet[with that reply] gave a response to Aisha's father and also
Gave her father a reason why he can marry his daughter lawfully.

After the response given by the prophet,the was no record of Aisha's father opposing the prophet's marriage to Aisha. every other things that comes later in pro's arguments are baseless insulting and provocative assumptions.

Furthermore,am beginning to think the pro does not really understand this topic and he seems to be arguing for under age sex rather than Aisha being raped.when the father of a lady does not give consent to a marriage,we can't just jump to the conclusion that she was raped.

If the father does not give his consent to the marriage and we jump to the conclusion that she was raped,the following questions need to be answered:

#.WHERE WAS AISHA RAPED?
#.HOW DID SHE GET TO WHERE SHE WAS RAPED?
#.WHERE WAS HER FATHER WHEN SHE WAS RAPED?
# WHEN SHE GOT TO BE A WOMAN, WE EXPECT SHE MAKES A MOVE ON THE CRIME, WHAT WAS HER MOVE?
#.WHEN A 9YR OLD GIRL WAS RAPED,WHAT ACTION WAS TAKEN BY HER FATHER?

To further buttress my point,the pro wants us to believe that since the father does not give his consent,we should jump to the conclusion that she was raped,dating back from previous centuries,we have heard and read of different stories whereby lovers marry against the consent of their parents.an example is cited below:
http://www.maniacworld.com......

We have so many relationship today not even marriage and sexual intercourse occurs without the consent of either one of the parents of the male or female,THEN SHOULD WE CALL THOSE RELATIONSHIP RAPE??

To round up my first round of rebutall,that the father of the lady does not give his consent does not necessarily means rape.when a case of rape occurs,the consent of the lady in question is needed not the father as the father is not the person in question.

IN MY LAST NOTE. the pro wrote
//Aisha is too young to be sexually molested. //
we know if we stand in court with evident presented by pro and makes this statement, it is a contempt, as we can see that nothing like 'molestation' is in any evident.

lastly, i will like to express my shock on the ignorance of the pro, apart from being dirty, pro is ignorant of his subject. he wrote

//It is unfortunate that billions of people worship and emulate this man//

this is laughable. thinking muslims worship muhammed (which is a crime in islam) and here we have pro debating islam. i shall not be surprised on the blunders to come
ade2likes

Pro

In my introduction I clearly stated that rape can be defined in so many ways. Giving us the definition from your own source does not make yours sancrosant or authoritative. The most important aspect of rape is CONSENT, unfortunately the Con failed to produced any evidence if Muhammad pedophilic relationship with Aisha took place with her consent. Furthermore, the Con does not know that there is marital rape according to constitution. A husband can be prosecuted for raping his wife!

Arab year is lunar, which is shorter than solar year. In solar years, Aisha was 8 years 9 months old when Muhammad consummated his marriage with her. Consummate? This is a nice way to say raped her. According to Muslims, a woman must consent to her marriage or the marriage is null. How can a 6-years old child consent to her marriage? Without a consent, how can we call this relationship between a 51 years old man and a 6-years old child marriage? I repeat, the Con must produced an evidence showing Aisha was ever consented before Muhammad married her!

The Con also claim that it was Abu Bakr who approached Muhammad asking him to marry his daughter. This is not true.

The Prophet asked Abu Bakr for 'Aisha's hand in marriage. Abu Bakr said "But I am your brother." The Prophet said, "You are my brother in Allah's religion and His Book, but she (Aisha) is lawful for me to marry." Bukhari 7.62.18

Even though Abu Bakr was fool enough to let Muhammad have sex with his little daughter, that marriage was invaled, because the only person who should have given consent was a minor. Aisha was unaware of what was going on and was surprised when Muhammad pulled down his pants and invited her to sit on his lap. She Narrated:

When the Prophet married me, my mother came to me and made me enter the house (of the Prophet) and nothing surprised me but the coming of Allah's Apostle to me in the forenoon. Bukhari 7. 62. 90

Aisha was playing with dolls like any other 8 year old child would do. She was not ready for marriage and had no understanding of it.

Narrated 'Aisha:
I used to play with the dolls in the presence of the Prophet, and my girl friends also used to play with me. When Allah's Apostle used to enter (my dwelling place) they used to hide themselves, but the Prophet would call them to join and play with me. (The playing with the dolls and similar images is forbidden, but it was allowed for 'Aisha at that time, as she was a little girl, not yet reached the age of puberty.) (Fateh-al-Bari page 143, Vol.13) Bukhari 8. 73.151

Narrated Aisha:
The Prophet engaged me when I was a girl of six (years). We went to Medina and stayed at the home of Bani-al-Harith bin Khazraj. Then I got ill and my hair fell down. Later on my hair grew (again) and my mother, Um Ruman, came to me while I was playing in a swing with some of my girl friends. She called me, and I went to her, not knowing what she wanted to do to me. She caught me by the hand and made me stand at the door of the house. I was breathless then, and when my breathing became Allright, she took some water and rubbed my face and head with it. Then she took me into the house. There in the house I saw some Ansari women who said, "Best wishes and Allah's Blessing and a good luck." Then she entrusted me to them and they prepared me (for the marriage). Unexpectedly Allah's Apostle came to me in the forenoon and my mother handed me over to him, and at that time I was a girl of nine years of age. Bukhari 5.234

Having sexual feelings for small children is called pedophilia. If Muhammad were to be alive, he would be arrested, prosecuted and jailed for three count charges viz Pedophilia, Child molestation and Rape.

The Con also made a preposterous remark that on what basis should we judge between good and bad. Should we condone pedophilia and child marriage because it was practiced by Muhammad? It is a crime if it was being done by someonelse but halal if was done by Muhammad? This is called Moral relativism.

Also, Con said Aisha was lawful for Muhammad to marry. How true is that?

Arabs were a primitive lot with little rules to abide. Yet they had some code of ethics that they honored scrupulously. For example, although they fought all the year round, they abstained from hostilities during certain holy months of the year. They also considered Mecca to be a holy city and did not make war against it. A adopted son"s wife was deemed to be a daughter in law and they would not marry her. Also it was customary that close friends made a pact of brotherhood and considered each other as true brothers. The Prophet disregarded all of these rules anytime they stood between him and his interests or whims.

Abu Bakr and Muhammad had pledged to each other to be brothers. So according to their costoms Ayesha was supposed to be like a niece to the prophet. Yet that did not stop him to ask her hand even when she was only six years old.
But this moral relativist Prophet would use the same excuse to reject a woman he did not like.

Sahih Bukhari V.7, B62, N. 37
Narrated Ibn 'Abbas:
It was said to the Prophet, "Won't you marry the daughter of Hamza?" He said, "She is my foster niece (brother's daughter). "

Hamza and Abu Bakr both were the foster brothers of Muhammad. But Ayesha must have been too pretty for the Prophet to abide by the codes of ethics and custom. The Con should tell us how Aisha is lawful for Muhammad to Marry. If Aisha is lawful for him to marry why did he used the same excuse in rejecting daughter of Hamza when Aisha is supposed to be like a niece to Muhammad? Oh I forgot the prophet of Allah is beyond rules and regulations (pun intended)

In fact, it is muhammad who was even fantacizing about Aisha in his dreams. In the following Hadith he confided to Ahesha that he had dreamed of her before soliciting her from her father.

Sahih Bukhari 9.140
Narrated 'Aisha:
Allah's Apostle said to me, "You were shown to me twice (in my dream) before I married you. I saw an angel carrying you in a silken piece of cloth, and I said to him, 'Uncover (her),' and behold, it was you. I said (to myself), 'If this is from Allah, then it must happen.

Whether Muhammad had actually such dream or he just said it to please Ayesha is not the point. What matters here is that it indicates that Ayesaha was a baby being "carried" by an angel when the Prophet dreamed of her.

I would like the Con to give us the definition of sex and marriage. Muhammad sexual activities with Ayesha is not sex but rape since there was no consent on her part. Sex is between two consenting individual but unfortunately, there was no consent on Aisha's part. A 9 year old child doesn't understand the meaning of sex. The Wordweb dictionary defines sex as the act of sexual procreation between a man and a WOMAN; the man's penis is inserted into the woman's vagina and excited until orgasm and ejaculation occur.

It is clear sex is not between a man and a minor of 9! What should we call Muhammad sexual relation with Aisha? Legal sex or rape? If it is legal sex produce an evidence to her consent on the marriage or to the sexual intercourse. If not Muhammad is guilty as charged! Not consenting Aisha before marrying her has even rendered the marriage null and void yet my erudite opponent has the temerity to call that marriage!

If Muhammad didn't damaged Aisha's womb then why didn't Aisha conceived despite spending at least 5-6 years with Muhammad before his death? Unless you tell us Muhammad was impotent!

You asked "
#.WHERE WAS AISHA RAPED?
#.HOW DID SHE GET TO WHERE SHE WAS RAPED?
#.WHERE WAS HER FATHER WHEN SHE WAS RAPED?
# WHEN SHE GOT TO BE A WOMAN, WE EXPECT SHE MAKES A MOVE ON THE CRIME, WHAT WAS HER MOVE?
#.WHEN A 9YR OLD GIRL WAS RAPED,WHAT ACTION WAS TAKEN BY HER FATHER?"

I will give you answer to all these bunkum questions of yours. Honestly your logic appalls me.

1. She was raped in Muhammad's house
2.Muhammad married her. So she got to Muhammad's house because of the marriage.
3.Her father was not there since she was living with Muhammad after marrying her. Did you expect her father to be present while Muhammad was doing it? Ridiculous!
4.Before she could become a woman Muhammad was already dead through poisoning.
5.Her father didn't do anything. Why? He believed Muhammad was a true messenger of God acting according to Allah's order. That was why I called him fool previously!

Do you see how stupid and ridiculous your questions sound? I am surprised someone in the 21st century is thinking like 7th century barbarian.

Quote:

"
To further buttress my point,the pro wants us to believe that since the father does not give his consent,we should jump to the conclusion that she was raped,dating back from previous centuries,we have heard and read of different stories whereby lovers marry against the consent of their parents.an example is cited below:
http://www.maniacworld.com...;

I'm afraid Con is incriminating Muhammad more with this statement. Lovers do married without their parents consent. But we are not talking about the parent consent here, we arw talking about Aisha's consent. You just shot yourself in the foot! You are yet to produced Aisha consent to the marriage or the sexual intercourse. We shouldn't forget that in Islam marriage without the bride consent is invalid. Yes invalid!

Quote:

We have so many relationship today not even marriage and sexual intercourse occurs without the consent of either one of the parents of the male or female,THEN SHOULD WE CALL THOSE RELATIONSHIP RAPE??"

You are right Con! Such relationship exist but what you fail to produce is Aisha consent herself. Her parent consent is secondary. The difference between what you said is that those sexual relations are consensual between both parties unlike Muhammad sexual escapade with Aisha which was behind her knowledge. She is too young to understand sex! She was never consented about the marriage and the sex. Muhammad raped her!

Quote:

To round up my first round of rebutall,that the father of the lady does not give his consent does not necessarily means rape.when a case of rape occurs,the consent of the lady in question is needed not the father as the father is not the person in question."

Thank you Con! I can't say it better than this. You are right. The consent of the person in question is needed not her father. Now show us how Aisha was consented by Muhammad before defiling her. The onus of proof is now on you con. I thought you are defending Muhammad, but to me now, it seems you are actually against him by incriminating him more!

Finally, the Con gave us some quote and statistics of marriages from various religion which I found laughable! You are appealing to a logical fallacy called "Red herring'. You are diverting our attention to another subject of irrelevance. And how does that disprove Muhammad being a rapist? Didn't Muhammad claimed to be a mercy to mankind, the best example to follow? Is this what we should follow and emulate? Raping minors calling it marriage? Muhammad has laid a bad precedent for Muslims to follow since Muslims are commanded to follow and emulate Muhammad to the letter. I do not know if Con would be able to give out his 9 year old child for marriage. It is pathethic the Con will have the temerity to call Aisha pedophilic relationship with Aisha a Marriage. Let's call a spade a spade Muhammad raped Aisha.

Did I said Muslims worshipped Muhammad? Yes Muslims ignorantly worshipped Muhammad in place of Allah. In order not to commit red herring, I will not go into that unless the Con permits me.

Conclusion: I stood by comments that Muhammad raped Aisha since she was not consented to the marriage which should be invalid according to Islam. To make the matter worse, she gave no consent to any sex with Muhammad before he pulled down her pant.

I still remain cordially yours

Regards!
Debate Round No. 2
ashraff

Con

i shall refute my opponent line by line with the exclusion of lines that are nothing but insults. viewers should bear with his hate and lack of manners

//In my introduction I clearly stated that rape can be defined in so many ways. Giving us the definition from your own source does not make yours sancrosant or authoritative. The most important aspect of rape is CONSENT//

my response
you do not give any definition. i gave a definition from the owners of the language of the language we are communicating with. you have no place in telling us what rape is and what it is not. My source is encarta dictionary and its not "my" source for it is a academic general and popular source. CONSENT of sex between two couples is a ridiculous question unless an evidence is established. you cant be asking married people around if their sex is mutual agreement because it is agreement that brought together in the first place. so the pro shot himself in the leg because it can be said that he has not provided any evidence that Aisha was raped by his husband. the hadith brought forward can not be tenable to sue anybody.

//Arab year is lunar, which is shorter than solar year.//

my response
you will do better in your maths to make any point from here. the lunar calendar has 12 months like the the solar.
the pro kept repeating that aisha's did not consent to her marriage, but i wonder where he got this from.

WAS THERE AN EVIDENCE THAT AISHA WAS DEAF AND DUMB WHEN SHE GOT MARRIED?
IS THE PRO SAYING THAT ALL THE MARRIAGES WHERE THE BRIDE IS YOUNG IS RAPE? is this the definition of rape? The minimum age for marriage in the US-State of Delaware in year 1895 was 7. were all the men that married legally during this time rapists?

i asked about the how the pro makes his moral judgement but he is afraid to answer because he does not understand common sense. we dont expect you to base your judgement on what you think because you are nobody to make moral judgement. i suggested (and i am right) that the pro makes his judgement with his religion where he learnt ethics and here is what we found. Mary, who is the mother of his god got impregnated by holy spirit between the ages of 11 and 14. Joseph (her husband) was as old as 99 when he married Mary when she was in the age range above (http://www.newadvent.org...),. is the pro saying the holy spirit is a rapist or mary had no clue what was going on in her life?

Aisha's parents were the ones who married her to our Prophet as no evidence says contrary, and that no Muslim or even pagan objected to the marriage because it was widely practiced. And even until today in 3rd world countries (Muslims and non-Muslims), little girls as young as 9 or 10 do get married. so what is the pro's issue? is it that he lacks historical knowledge or he is just angry?

her is an hadith the pro once misquoted

Narrated Aisha: "The Prophet engaged me when I was a girl of six (years). We went to Medina and stayed at the home of Bani-al-Harith bin Khazraj. Then I got ill and my hair fell down. Later on my hair grew (again) and my mother, Um Ruman, came to me while I was playing in a swing with some of my girl friends. She called me, and I went to her, not knowing what she wanted to do to me. She caught me by the hand and made me stand at the door of the house. I was breathless then, and when my breathing became Alright, she took some water and rubbed my face and head with it. Then she took me into the house. There in the house I saw some ANSARI WOMEN who said, "Best wishes and Allah's Blessing and a good luck." Then she entrusted me to them and they prepared me (for the marriage). Unexpectedly Allah's Apostle came to me in the forenoon and my mother handed me over to him, and at that time I was a girl of nine years of age. (Translation of Sahih Bukhari, Merits of the Helpers in Madinah (Ansaar), Volume 5, Book 58, Number 234)"

Notice here that Aisha's mother and the Muslim women back then were ok with her marriage. the marriage is public and no one will ever say rape, or forced marriage is involved.

POINT 2:the pro wrote from the doll hadith
Please NOTE: Narrated 'Aisha: I used to play with the dolls in the presence of the Prophet.

REBUTTAL:
The pro wants us to note the narration of Aisha and I also want readers to note the word "USED".

---------------------------
USED:
Main Entry:used to
Pronunciation:\"y"sd. sometimes"y"z pronunc attoFunction:adverb
Etymology: fr. the verb phrase used to,fr.used,past of2use to,function word normally indicating that the following verb is an infinitive
dial: formerly, once

http://www.merriam-webster.com.......

The words my opponent wants us to note signify that "AISHA WAS NARRATING WHAT SHE USED TO DO[playing with dolls]".

Furthermore,the words my opponent wants us to note shows that Aisha remembers what she used to do when she was young.now,some questions arise,for example:

#.WHICH IS EASIER TO REMEMBER,RAPE OR PLAYING WITH DOLLS?
#.WHY DIDN'T AISHA REPORT BEING RAPED?

If aisha was raped,we should be seeing something like this in the hadiths:
Narrated aisha:the prophet raped me when I was nine,OR:

Narrated aisha:the prophet had sex with me without my consent.

BUT WE FIND NONE OF THOSE REPORTS IN THE HADITH!!

To explain further,if Aisha can vividly remember playing with dolls then she should be able to report being raped by the prophet whereas she never said she was raped.

The pro makes me to wonder why someone will cry for another person's headache.if aisha never complained of being raped,why should the pro accuse the prophet of raping aisha when no single record shows the prophet raped her.

Lest I forget,I will like to inform the pro to understand a topic before he ventures in to support it as the pro was busy arguing for under aged marriage and pedophilia [which we can discuss in another debate] instead of showing us how the prophet raped aisha according to the definition used to describe rape.

pro wrote:

//Arabs were a primitive lot with little rules to abide. Yet they had some code of ethics that they honored scrupulously. For example, although they fought all the year round, they abstained from hostilities during certain holy months of the year. They also considered Mecca to be a holy city and did not make war against it. A adopted son"s wife was deemed to be a daughter in law and they would not marry her. Also it was customary that close friends made a pact of brotherhood and considered each other as true brothers. The Prophet disregarded all of these rules anytime they stood between him and his interests or whims.//

1: the pro is in no position to bring in the culture or history of arabs without reference
2: Muhammed is a muslims, he shall not be judged by mere (jaliyyah laws. arab ignorance) law
3: this has nothing to do with the topic.

it is now not common silly when the pro is comparing a brother in religion with blood brothers.

Narrated Ursa
The Prophet asked Abu Bakr for 'Aisha's hand in marriage. Abu Bakr said "But I am your brother." The Prophet said,
"You are my brother in Allah's religion and His Book, but she (Aisha) is lawful for me to marry." sahih Al-Bukhari Hadith

Sahih Bukhari V.7, B62, N. 37
Narrated Ibn 'Abbas:
It was said to the Prophet, "Won't you marry the daughter of Hamza?" He said, "She is my foster niece (brother's daughter). "

the pro should note that common sense is important in debate. asking if an husband has raped his wife within marriage becomes a nonsensical question over and over. just like have stated, aisha, when she was young, old and after the death of muhammed never brought up being raped yet she beats a lot of men in the reportage of the prophet (hadith narrations)

and here is how my opponent answerd to my question which makes me really want to know his age or whether he is joking around.

You asked "
#.WHERE WAS AISHA RAPED?
#.HOW DID SHE GET TO WHERE SHE WAS RAPED?
#.WHERE WAS HER FATHER WHEN SHE WAS RAPED?
# WHEN SHE GOT TO BE A WOMAN, WE EXPECT SHE MAKES A MOVE ON THE CRIME, WHAT WAS HER MOVE?
#.WHEN A 9YR OLD GIRL WAS RAPED,WHAT ACTION WAS TAKEN BY HER FATHER?"

I will give you answer to all these bunkum questions of yours. Honestly your logic appalls me.

//1. She was raped in Muhammad's house//
common sense will seek for evidence here and that is what i asked

//2.Muhammad married her. So she got to Muhammad's house because of the marriage//.
this is wrongful accusation. if i ask how did your father raped your mother, you wont say it is because they were both married

//3.Her father was not there since she was living with Muhammad after marrying her. Did you expect her father to be present while Muhammad was doing it? Ridiculous!//

her father was not there, thought he and the rapist lived in the same time and space yet, you from 2000 years later know she was raped. how can this be a debate please?

//4.Before she could become a woman Muhammad was already dead through poisoning.//

which Muhammed are u talking here? are we still discussing prophet muhammed, or you already switched to your family member that died of poison? this question is not answered at all.

//5.Her father didn't do anything. Why? He believed Muhammad was a true messenger of God acting according to Allah's order. That was why I called him fool previously!//

here is another insult. if it is ok to insult people respected by the opponent, i could have being calling jehovah that impregnated mary when she was 12 terrible name. this is childish

CONSENT
where is the evidence that aisha did not consent to her marriage? is it normal to ask a lady that never complained about her marriage whether she consent to her marriage? no. how do we know where a lady consent to her marriage? we provide evidence!. so the pro need to prove to us that aisha did not consent to her marriage.

in my conclusion, reading through the pro's arguments, it feels like watching a teenager running around pants down in broad daylight. it insults
ade2likes

Pro

It is obvious the Con is dragging us back to the definition of rape. I clearly stated that rape has various definition that varies from one another. What do you want me to define again Con? I gave a very simple definition of rape. Well, it seems the definition is more important than the allegation against Muhammad being a "Rapist", I will give you some definitions of rape from various sources. Are you ok with that Sir?

First of all, section 357 of the Criminal Code defines rape and it has this to say: "Any person who has unlawful carnal knowledge of woman or girl without her CONSENT or with her CONSENT, If the CONSENT is obtained by force or by means of FALSE or FRAUDULENT representation as to the nature of act, or in the case of a married woman by impersonating her husband, is guilty of the offence which is called rape. Source: Section 357 of the Nigerian Criminal Code.

Definition of Rape. The exact definition of "rape" differs from state-to-state within the U.S. and by country internationally. In the US, it is often called "criminal sexual conduct in the first degree". Generally, rape is defined as sexual contact or penetration achieved:

without CONSENT, or
with use of physical force, coercion, deception, threat, and/or
when the victim is:

mentally incapacitated or impaired,
physically impaired (due to voluntary or involuntary alcohol or drug consumption)
asleep or unconscious.

One of the most critical issues regarding rape is consent. Sexual activity should not take place unless both parties have freely given CONSENT, and CONSENT is understood by both parties.

SILENCE does not mean CONSENT

Source:http://www.pandys.org...

Rape is a type of sexual assault usually involving sexual intercourse or other forms of sexual penetration perpetrated against a person without that person's CONSENT. The act may be carried out by physical force, coercion, abuse of authority or against a person who is incapable of VALID CONSENT, such as one who is unconscious, incapacitated, or below the legal age of CONSENT.

Source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org...

Note: All emphasis are mine.

By now the Con must have been satisfied with those definitions. You wrote:

"CONSENT of sex between two couples is a ridiculous question unless an evidence is established. you cant be asking married people around if their sex is mutual agreement because it is agreement that brought together in the first place. so the pro shot himself in the leg because it can be said that he has not provided any evidence that Aisha was raped by his husband. the hadith brought forward can not be tenable"

I'm afraid your analogy is wrong sir. Yes it is agreement that binds couples together as you said. Please give us the agreement between Muhammad and Ayesha not between Muhammad and Abu Bakr. Calling Ayesha Muhammad's wife is preposterous, gibberish and sheer baloney because the little girl gave no consent to the marriage. The little girl didn't know what was going on. She was too young to understand sex and marriage(a lifetime institution). Hence, since there was no consent on her part Muhammad is guilty as charged.

I have a very important question for Con. According to Islam, a girl must be consented before getting her married. Why didn't Muhammad consent Ayesha before marrying her? Even if she was ever consented, she was too young to make a gigantic decision like marriage. We are not talking about whether she will eat chocolate or not, we are talking about a 9 year old child spending her eternity with a 54 year old man nearing his grave without her Consent to the marriage. To you it is marriage because Muhammad did it, but to rational people this is pure rape.

The con make the marriage look like a consensual one by branding it "couples", as if it was a marriage between two consenting adult. That is understatement because Muhammad married Ayesha when she was 6-years old and consumed his marriage with her when she was 9-years-old. How could a 54 year-old man calling himself the messenger God have sexual feelings for a 9-year-old girl? Is that the Con definition of marriage? Where an old man in his fiftys rape a minor with the pretext of marriage?

I am not bothered of the marriage of the prophet with a daughter of Abu Bakr, but the fact that Ayesha was a child. It is not proper for a messenger of God to have sexual feelings for a little girl and it is unconscionable to act on them. In this day and age if a 54-year-old man has an intercourse with a 9-year-old girl he will be jailed and despised as a pedophile-Rapist. Why should the Prophet be forgiven?

Furthermore, you said:

"WAS THERE AN EVIDENCE THAT AISHA WAS DEAF AND DUMB WHEN SHE GOT MARRIED?
IS THE PRO SAYING THAT ALL THE MARRIAGES WHERE THE BRIDE IS YOUNG IS RAPE? is this the definition of rape? The minimum age for marriage in the US-State of Delaware in year 1895 was 7. were all the men that married legally during this time rapists?"

This questions defies logic! Ayesha was neither deaf, dumb nor blind when Muhammad married her without her own consent. So? What are you getting at precisely Con? Oh! You meant she should have said I am not marrying Muhammad because he is an old man old enough to be my Grand Father? right? The Con is making this marriage look like the 9 year old girl was an adult who can discern what marriage is. This is absurd! Can you just cite a single reference where either Muhammad or Abu Bakr ever consented Ayesha before betrothing her to Muhammad. Since there was no consent on her part it is rape. Muhammad married her without consenting her and slept with her without consenting her as well. What should we call such sexual intercourse or the marriage itself? The fact remains that Muhammad also broke Islamic rule himself by marrying Aisha without her knowledge, because in Islam, the bride must be consented before getting her married. The Con is incriminating Muhammad more and more with his petty excuses. Aisha is not deaf and dumb but she knew nothing about sex or marriage because she was a minor who needs education, not ejaculation, pen, not penis of Muhammad!

My opponent made another point by citing the age limit for marriage in the U.S state of Delaware. I'm afraid my opponent is engaging in a logical fallacy called Tu Quoque(You Too) or the appeal to hypocrisy. This fallacy illustrates that if I accuse Muhammad of rape then I must accuse the U.S state of Delaware too of rape since they also marry minor in 1895 as well. I am afraid the Con is incriminating Muhammad more. This people never claimed to be thel ast messenger of God,the best example to follow, the most perfect man, the seal of prophets and every other title Muhammad betrothed to himself. Therefore, comparing them to Muhammad is nonsensical unless the Con admit that these people are as the same as Muhammad or even better since they never claimed to be the messenger of God who came to guide mankind. I thought you are here to defend Muhammad but to my surprise you are dragging him in the mud more sir! Are you admitting Muhammad was just like an ordinary man not a prophet anymore? Eh!

The Con also said and I quote:

"I asked about the how the pro makes his moral judgement but he is afraid to answer because he does not understand common sense. we dont expect you to base your judgement on what you think because you are nobody to make moral judgement. i suggested (and i am right) that the pro makes his judgement with his religion where he learnt ethics and here is what we found. Mary, who is the mother of his god got impregnated by holy spirit between the ages of 11 and 14. Joseph (her husband) was as old as 99 when he married Mary when she was in the age range above (http://www.newadvent.org......),. is the pro saying the holy spirit is a rapist or mary had no clue what was going on in her life?

Readers can see the Con is engaging in red herring again by diverting our attention to Mary and Joseph which is not the topic at hand. Well you don't need to be a professor to know that sleeping with minors is ethically and morally wrong. According to the moral judgement of the Con raping minors with marriage pretext is right I presumed?

I am condemning a man who called himself the Prophet of Allah, the "Mercy of God in the worlds" Rahmatu"llah lil Alamin" and the example for all mankind, who instead of setting the example of morality and rectitude followed the customs of his primitive society and thus reaffirmed them and perpetuated them as something to emulate. We are judging Muhammad based on his own title he made he called himself. Obviously we all cringe when we think of pedophilia and acknowledge that it is a shameful act of immorality. But during the time of Muhammad, and even today in some Islamic countries, marrying a 9-year-old child was not immoral. The question is, if sleeping with a nine year old child was not deemed bad and therefore was not considered immoral, was it ok? Not everything that a society accepts as moral is right. Having sex with a minor may not have been immoral for Arabs 1400 years ago, but it is now, as it was then, unethical. Moralities are defined by circumstances, but ethics transcend time and space. They are rooted in logics. Morality can vary from culture to culture, from time to time and from person to person. Who is to determine what is moral and what is not? Right?

Raping a minor may not have been immoral for Muhammad and his contemporaries in that uncivilized culture, but it was ethically wrong. If Muhammad was a messenger of God or an honorable man, as he made his Allah to proclaim him thus, he should have known that what he was doing was dishonorable and unethical. Hence, Muhammad raped Aisha.

The Con said:

"Aisha's parents were the ones who married her to our Prophet as no evidence says contrary, and that no Muslim or even pagan objected to the marriage because it was widely practiced. And even until today in 3rd world countries (Muslims and non-Muslims), little girls as young as 9 or 10 do get married. so what is the pro's issue? is it that he lacks historical knowledge or he is just angry?"

The Con lied. It was Muhammad who requested for Aisha. The Prophet did not marry Ayesha at the insistence of her parents. There are many Hadithes that show it was the Prophet who desired Ayesha and asked Abu Bakr to give him his then 6-year-old daughter for marriage. In fact Abu Barkr was shocked by such a request. He objected that he was a foster brother to the Prophet, which would have made such a marriage illicit. But the Prophet dismissed his concern saying that they were not real blood brothers and their oath of brotherhood was of no relevance in this case.

Sahih Bukhari 7.18
Narrated 'Ursa:
The Prophet asked Abu Bakr for 'Aisha's hand in marriage. Abu Bakr said "But I am your brother." The Prophet said, "You are my brother in Allah's religion and His Book, but she (Aisha) is lawful for me to marry."

You asked if I'm angry. Yes I am. I am angry that a man who call himself a prophet of God slept with a 9 yr old without her consent which is rape. I am angry because ever since the death of Muhammad Muslims have been emulating and evincing this shameful act of raping little children by with the pretext of marriage. I am angry because Muhammad not only raped Aisha, she destroyed her childhood and womanhood. He destroyed her childhood by depriving Ayesha her the fundamental human right to choose her spouse by herself. He destroyed her womanhood because after the death if Muhammad the young widow never remarried since Muhammad prohibited anyone from marrying her after his demise. She never bare any child till she died. Now tell me why I shouldn't be angry? Would you be happy if she was your daughter?

You also said marriage with minors was widely practiced in Muhammad's time. Really? Didn't Muhammad claimed he had come to bring people out of ignorance by calling the pre-islamic era Jahiliya(ignorance)? Why was he doing the same thing? If he had come to bring people out of ignorance why didn't he stop this savage and shameful act of raping minors calling it marriage? Has this not shown Muhammad Muhammad was charlatan opportunist who used god to ride his benighted followers?

Although it is true that in the past people married at very young age. And it is also true that occasionally wealthy old men married very young girls. We have to realize that these people acted on their culture. We do not condemn them for they did not know better. What they did was the norm. But we do condemn those cultures.

However, we cannot forgive with the same amnesty those who claimed to be the standard of rectitude amongst mankind. If average people could not distinguish the right from the wrong, the messengers of God, if they were from God, should have known better. If their claim was true, if their knowledge was divine, if they were inspired, they should not have followed the tradition of their people but should have set the example. Muhammad followed the morality of his people. But that morality was ethically wrong. He claimed to be the best human and the last messenger of God. According to him God has said to people all he wanted to say in the Quran and his religion is complete. There is no more guidance to come and his examples and teachings are all we need to know and follow for eternity. Yet what he did and said, under the light of modern values prove to be very wrong.

Now we realize that we cannot live by his examples any more, nor can we practice his teachings. Our morality has changed. We would certainly put a man in jail if he wanted to follow the Sunnah of the prophet in this day and age and "marry" a 9-year-old child. We would not allow someone to take people as slaves or trade in slavery as Muhammad did.

If we cannot follow the morality of Muhammad any more, if what he said and did do not fit in this modern day, why we need Muhammad? What part of his teachings should we accept and what part should we discard? Who will determine that? This is an important question. If we give ourselves the freedom to pick and choose the teachings that most suit us we should give the same freedom to others.

Furthermore you quoted Sahih Bukhari 5.58.234 to show Ayesha was not raped since it was her parents who took her to Muhammad's house. The Con forgotted that the consent of the girl is what we are talking about here not her parents. The hadith state that she was playing on a swing before she was taken to Muhammad's house. The Con still fail to show if there is any consent of Ayesha here. Therefore, Muhammad raped her. She has no knowledge of what was going on until Muhammad appeared to her undress. No wonder her hair fell!

Con siad" urthermore,the words my opponent wants us to note shows that Aisha remembers what she used to do when she was young.now,some questions arise,for example:

#.WHICH IS EASIER TO REMEMBER,RAPE OR PLAYING WITH DOLLS?
#.WHY DIDN'T AISHA REPORT BEING RAPED?

If aisha was raped,we should be seeing something like this in the hadiths:
Narrated aisha:the prophet raped me when I was nine,OR:

Narrated aisha:the prophet had sex with me without my consent.

BUT WE FIND NONE OF THOSE REPORTS IN THE HADITH!!
'

This is nonsense. Aisha was a kid that doesn't understand what sex is so it is obvious she remembered her doll more than the escapade. She did not know what Muhammad did to her!

Why should Aisha report rape when she doesn't even understand what sex is? Are you joking? This is absolute nonsense. Even if she ever reported being raped, will Muhammad followers pu thay in record too? Won't that discredit Muhammad?

You must give us a reference where Aisha consent was ever questioned. Not only that, you must give us an hadith that says "the prophet married me with my consent' ls there any? Bring it forth!

Finally, you wrote: "CONSENT
where is the evidence that aisha did not consent to her marriage? is it normal to ask a lady that never complained about her marriage whether she consent to her marriage? no. how do we know where a lady consent to her marriage? we provide evidence!. so the pro need to prove to us that aisha did not consent to her marriage."

I have proven beyond reasonable doubts that Aisha was not consented before he was married to Muhammad. According to Islamic law, the marriage is null and void since there was no consent on her part. Hence, Muhammad Raped her! The con should give us a narration where Aisha was asked if he would marry Muhammad.

Conclusion: Aisha was a kid that doesn't understand what sex it. She never consented on the marriage or the sex(read, RAPE). Since there was no consent on her part rape is rape. Muhammad raped her!

There is no consensual relationship between a 9yr old and a 54 yr old man. There is no mutual or consensual sex between a child and an old man of 54. Therefore, Muhammad is guilty of not only rape but child molestation and pedophilia.

The rest of your rebuttals are ad hominem. I won't comment on that.

I remain cordially yours

Regards!
Debate Round No. 3
ashraff

Con

I shall ignore mostly all said by pro because, sorry to say, all I see is ranting and repetition of already destroyed points, it even get hilarious when the pro claims knowledge of Islamic laws.. it a point where one will say "hold up, stop right there". However, I wont let the readers down now because I am set for new interesting argument which should come in no better time than now because they are based on roping the pro with his logic. I will present just two, the first I call "the hadith approach" while the other is called the "common sense" approach.

THE HADITH APPROACH
As a muslim, we understand our religion more than the pagans and that should be respected as we can be an authority with our culture. I am not proposing blind argument here but common sense which whether the pro like it or now he needs to work with. The first law in hadith is that, whatever comes in the quran have superiority to whatever comes in hadith, and another one suggests that, in the evidence of contradiction (which can happen because hadiths are real life narrations from men), history, frequency of repetition, common sense or believing in constant message shall be given privilege.

For example: (I will give only graphical example because of space)
If it is said that muhammed performed a miracle and the first hadith says there were 100 people present and the second says there were 115 people there, muslims will focus on the event and discard the contradicting numbers.

In the event of the topic, it has being proven beyond doubt that the age of Aisha at marriage cannot be determined with the hadiths in question. I will be the shorter version of the argument.
According to almost all the historians, Asma the elder sister of Aisha, was ten years older than Aisha. It is reported in Taqreeb al-Tehzeeb as well as in Ibn Kathir's Al-Bidayah wa al-Nihayah that Asma died in the 73rd year after migration of Muhammad when she was 100 years old.

Now, obviously if Asma was 100 years old in the 73rd year after Migration to Medina, she should have been 27 or 28 years old at the time of migration. If Asma was 27 or 28 years old at the time of hijrah, Aisha should have been 17 or 18 years old at that time. Thus, if Aisha got married in year 1 AH or 2 AH (after Migration to Medina), she must have been between 18 to 20 years old at the time of her marriage
According to the generally accepted tradition, Aisha was born about eight years before Hijrah (Migration to Medina). However, according to another narrative in Bukhari (Kitaab al-Tafseer) Aisha is reported to have said that at the time Surah Al-Qamar, the 54th chapter of the Qur"an , was revealed, "I was a young girl".
The 54th Surah of the Qur"an was revealed nine years before Hijrah. According to this tradition, Aisha had not only been born before the revelation of the referred Surah, but was actually a young girl, not even only an infant at that time. So if this age is assumed to be 7 to 14 years, then her (AISHA) age at the time of marriage would be 14 to 21.

Let say that"s not enough,
The Hadith regarding the age of Aisha (RA) during her marrige to Prophet PBUH.
Narrated `Aisha:
that the Prophet (A018;) married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old. Hisham said: I have been informed that `Aisha remained with the Prophet (A018;) for nine years (i.e. till his death).
Reference : Sahih al-Bukhari 5134 Book 67, Hadith 70
As you can see above we can read that Aisha (RA) was six years old when she got married and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old.
Whilst reading the Hadith we find out Hisham said? One has to ask who is Hisham?

Most of these narratives printed in the Hadith books are reported only by Hisham ibn `urwah reporting on the authority of his father. First, more people than just one, two or three should logically have reported. It is strange that no one from Medinah, where Hisham ibn `urwah lived the first seventy one years of his life has narrated the event, even though in Medinah his pupils included people as well known as Malik ibn Anas. The origins of the report of the narratives of this event are people from Iraq, where Hisham is reported to have shifted after living in Medinah for seventy-one years.
Tehzibu'l-tehzib, one of the most well known books on the life and the reliability of the narrators of the traditions of the Prophet (pbuh) report that according to Yaqub ibn Shaibah:
" He [Hisham] is highly reliable, his narratives are acceptable, except what he narrated after moving over to Iraq." (REF: Tehzi'bu'l-tehzi'b, Ibn Hajar Al-`asqala'ni, Dar Ihya al-turath al-Islami, 15thcentury. Vol 11, p. 50).

It further states that Malik ibn Anas objected on those narratives of Hisham which were reported through people of Iraq:
"I have been told that Malik [ibn Anas] objected on those narratives of Hisham which were reported through people of Iraq." (REF: Tehzi'b u'l-tehzi'b, Ibn Hajar Al-`asqala'ni, Dar Ihya al-turath al-Islami, Vol.11, p. 50)

Mizanu'l-ai`tidal, another book on the life sketches of the narrators of the traditions of the Prophet (pbuh) reports:
"When he was old, Hisham's memory suffered quite badly" (REF: Mizanu'l-ai`tidal, Al-Zahbi, Al-Maktabatu'l-athriyyah, Sheikhupura, Pakistan, Vol. 4, p. 301)

CONCLUSION: Based on these references, Hisham"s memory was failing and his narratives while in Iraq were unreliable. So, his narrative of Ayesha"s marriage and age are unreliable.

Let say that is not even enough

THE COMMON SENSE APPROACH
It is apparent that the pro keeps throwing on our face that Aisha did not consent to her marriage (WHICH NO EVIDENCE HAS BEEN PRESENTED OR WILL BE). The pro has no backing for age of consent, I had tried to borrow him sense from his bible on the age of consent and also from history, but he said it is "red herring""fine. So now, since the pro cant provide an age of consent according to any law (used in the past) (divine or constitutional). We shall assume that with his baseless arguement, any age a lady got married is rape. So by this, we can say as I am typing this (which is at the middle of the night), the pro"s father is probably raping his mummy. I am not sorry to say this because this is his implication of his argument. YOUR DAD IS A CRIMINAL (A RAPIST) BY YOUR DEFINITION. WOW!
CAN WE SAY THE SAME ABOUT MY DAD AND MUHAMMED?
My dad is a muslim, so is Muhammed so they both follow the injunction of quran which says:

And test the orhan until they attain age of marriage; then if you find in them maturity of intellect, make over to them their property, and do not consume it extravagantly and hastily, lest they attain to full age; and whoever is rich, let him abstain altogether, and whoever is poor, let him eat reasonably; then when you make over to them their property, call witnesses in their presence; and Allah is enough as a Reckoner. " Quran 4:6

The Quran has left the decision of the specific age of marriage to the judgment of man in his time. The pro did repeatedly say that if Muhammed live I our town he will be arrested. Well, he is not living in our time and so we can only judge him on what goes in the past. (I have presented what takes in the past in details from the early rounds). In the same sense that Obama will be killed for allowing gay marriage in the past.

Also, we see that the pro made out a claim to fall my historical and biblical reference (which by the way calls all Christian a rapist since he lowers the value of biblical moral), he wrote THAT SINCE MUHAMMED IS A PROPHET, AN EXAMPLE TO MUSLIMS, WE EXPECT BETTER, HIS MORALS SHOULD NOT BE JUDGED BY THE LAW OF THE LAND. But I ask of which law should Muhammed be judged, and how do we define better? Am sure the pro is not looking at himself as a standard since is just a boy with unreliable logic or morals. I will says he wants Muhammed to be judged by divine laws. Of cause, why not. I have presented the quranic verse suggesting age of consent. And since he claims to "know" Islamic law which he says incriminate muhammed, he shall provide the part of any law that incriminate Muhammed. I wont go again without providing to the readers the stance of his bible on this. I wonder how Jehovah will feels has pro blaspheme on him through his prophets and his son"s mother ( Church calls Abraham "our father in Faith" for that matter). Here is another "red herring" to my body of evidences. Lol

Abraham
In the book of Genesis in the Bible it is
recorded about Abraham:
"Now Sarai, Abram"s wife, had borne him no
children. But she had an Egyptian maidservant
named Hagar; so she said to Abram, "The Lord
has kept me from having children. Go, sleep
with my maidservant; perhaps I can build a
family through her." Abram agreed to what Sarai
said. So after Abram had been living in Canaan
ten years, Sarai his wife took her Egyptian
maidservant Hagar and gave her to her husband
to be his wife. He slept with Hagar, and she
conceived. " So Hagar bore Abram a son, and
Abram gave the name Ishmael to the son she
had borne. Abram was eighty-six years old when
Hagar bore him Ishmael." (Genesis, chapter 16,
verses 1"4, and 15"16, New International
Version)
Firstly, it is evident that as Abraham (who then
had the name Abram) was 86 years old, Hagar
must have been some fifty years younger than
him, and probably even younger, to bear a
child. Secondly, the Bible speaks of Sarai giving
her maidservant Hagar to Abraham. So Hagar"s
consent was not obtained but rather she was
commanded by Sarai to go and become Abraham"s wife.
Young, no consent, old husband = rape, right? Wow

In conclusion, all these people concerned never raised a rape flag: Muhammed, Aisha, Pagans at their time, Muslims at their time, pagans and muslims after their time, father of the bride, mother of the bride, Allah or Jehovah, however, a random personality 2000 years later says the marriage is rape with no evidence. Isn"t this just an insult to be ignored?

Thanks.
ade2likes

Pro

In the Con introduction he said:

"I shall ignore mostly all said by pro because, sorry to say, all I see is ranting and repetition of already destroyed points, it even get hilarious when the pro claims knowledge of Islamic laws.. it a point where one will say "hold up, stop right there". However, I wont let the readers down now because I am set for new interesting argument which should come in no better time than now because they are based on roping the pro with his logic. I will present just two, the first I call "the hadith approach" while the other is called the "common sense" approach."

It is clear for all to see that the Con is short of argument. Am I an Islamic scholar? I never said so, the Con did.

At the beginning of the debate, the Con didn't bother to talk about Ayesha's age with the so-called logic approach, but when the Con got cornered he reverted to HIS own logic-approach in determining the age of Aisha. This is not a comic, it is a debate. If you want to make people laugh you should go to a circus! The Con can do better being a stand up comedian(Pun intended).

Let's examine his so-called hadith approach and commonsense approach:

In the Con hadith approach he wrote:

"As a muslim, we understand our religion more than the pagans and that should be respected as we can be an authority with our culture. I am not proposing blind argument here but common sense which whether the pro like it or now he needs to work with. The first law in hadith is that, whatever comes in the quran have superiority to whatever comes in hadith, and another one suggests that, in the evidence of contradiction (which can happen because hadiths are real life narrations from men), history, frequency of repetition, common sense or believing in constant message shall be given privilege.

For example: (I will give only graphical example because of space)
If it is said that muhammed performed a miracle and the first hadith says there were 100 people present and the second says there were 115 people there, muslims will focus on the event and discard the contradicting numbers."

Note that the pagan he mentioned in his statement is me. I'm a pagan just because i don't share the same ideology with the Con. We can see from the beginning that the Con attack me in person rather than the subject. This is called Ad hominem. Well, I will maintain my civility as I have since the beginning of the debate.

The Con said since I'm a pagan(read, Christian) and he's a Muslim, he knows the Islamic culture more than me which I must respect. What culture are you talking about? A culture that sanction raping of minors with the pretext of marriage? A culture that supports beating of women? Marrying minors without their consent? Killing of apostate, gays, Atheist? Honor killings, chopping of hands, public beheading, female genital mutilation(FGM), terrorism etc? Or a culture that view women as imbeciles i.e deficient in intelligence? These are barbaric culture for primitive people.

Yes! Muslims understand their religion more than us. No wonder why you see evil men like Ayatollah Khomeini, Abu Bakr Al Baghdadi, Abubakar Shekau, Saddam Hussein, Idi Amin, Osama Bin Laden etc, understood the real Islam by becoming terrorists. Did they misunderstood Islam? What I understood in Islam is that Muhammad raped Aisha a 9-year old child!

You said whatever come in the Quran is superior before the ahadith yet we can find in the Quran where Muhammad said he cannot perform any miracle but in the hadith we can find bogus miracles attributed to Muhammad like splitting the moon. You must admit such miracles are forgery since they contradicted the Quran!

Furthermore, the Con said: "
In the event of the topic, it has being proven beyond doubt that the age of Aisha at marriage cannot be determined with the hadiths in question. I will be the shorter version of the argument."

Here again the Con is lying. According to the ahadith Aisha was six year old when Muhammad married her and raped her when she was 9 year old. Please don"t say it was not rape because a 9-year-old child is not mature enough to consent and if she cannot consent it is rape. Your defense incriminates the messenger of Allah even more than my accusations. You said that the marriage was symbolic. How symbolic it could be if the Prophet approached Ayesha when she, according to her own testimony, was still playing with her toys and gave her a completely different kind of toy to play with that "SURPRISED" that little girl?

Sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 90
Narrated Aisha:
When the Prophet married me, my mother came to me and made me enter the house (of the Prophet) and NOTHING SURPRISED ME BUT THE COMING OF ALLAH'S APOSTLE TO ME IN THE FORENOON.

There are numerous hadith that state Aisha's age when she married Muhammad. Here are some of them:

Sahih Muslim Book 008, Number 3310:
'A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported: Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) married me when I was six years old, and I was admitted to his house when I was nine years old.

Sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 64
Narrated '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).

Sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 65
Narrated 'Aisha:
that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old. Hisham said: I have been informed that 'Aisha remained with the Prophet for nine years (i.e. till his death)." what you know of the Quran (by heart)'

Sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 88
Narrated 'Ursa:
The Prophet wrote the (marriage contract) with 'Aisha while she was six years old and consummated his marriage with her while she was nine years old and she remained with him for nine years (i.e. till his death).

It is clear for all to see Aisha was 6 year old when Muhammad married her. It still amaze me how the Con could deny such overwhelming evidence from the hadith. This denial appalls me. Since the Con got cornered, the best form of defence for him is denying the hadith. Eh! What a logic!

The Con went on formulating a lot of theory in order to show Ayesha was above 6 year old when Muhammad married her. Readers should nor forget that my opponents has no problem with Aisha's age prior to now. He changed his tune she was more than 6 when Muhammad married her after I smashed all his evidence. He went on denying the hadith calling them inauthentic for determining the age of Aisha. This is nonsense! Let's look at what this hadith says:

Sunan Abu-Dawud Book 41, Number 4915, also Number 4916 and Number 4917
Narrated Aisha, Ummul Mu'minin:
The Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him) married me when I was seven or six. When we came to Medina, some women came. according to Bishr's version: Umm Ruman came to me when I was swinging. They took me, made me prepared and decorated me. I was then brought to the Apostle of Allah (peace_be_upon_him), and he took up cohabitation with me when I was nine. She halted me at the door, and I burst into laughter.

In the above hadith we read that Ayesha was swinging, This is a play of little girls not grown up people. The following Hadith is particularly interesting because it shows that Ayesha was so small that was not aware what was going on when the Holy Prophet "surprised" her by going to her.

Sahih Bukhari Volume 7, Book 62, Number 90
Narrated Aisha:
When the Prophet married me, my mother came to me and made me enter the house (of the Prophet) and nothing surprised me but the coming of Allah's Apostle to me in the forenoon.

Must have been quite a surprise! But the following is also interesting because it demonstrates that she was just a kid playing with her dolls. Pay attention to what the interpreter wrote in the parenthesis. (She was a little girl, not yet reached the age of puberty)

Sahih Bukhari Volume 8, Book 73, Number 151
Narrated 'Aisha:
I used to play with the dolls in the presence of the Prophet, and my girl friends also used to play with me. When Allah's Apostle used to enter (my dwelling place) they used to hide themselves, but the Prophet would call them to join and play with me. (The playing with the dolls and similar images is forbidden, but it was allowed for 'Aisha at that time, as she was a little girl, not yet reached the age of puberty.) (Fateh-al-Bari page 143, Vol.13)

Muhammad died when he was 63. So he must have married Ayesha when he as 51 and went to her when he was 54.

Sahih Bukhari Volume 8, Book 73, Number 33
Narrated 'Aisha:
I never felt so jealous of any woman as I did of Khadija, though she had died three years before the Prophet married me, and that was because I heard him mentioning her too often, and because his Lord had ordered him to give her the glad tidings that she would have a palace in Paradise, made of Qasab and because he used to slaughter a sheep and distribute its meat among her friends.

Khadija died in December of 619 AD. That is two years before Hijra. At that time the Prophet was 51-years-old. So in the same year that Khadija died the prophet married Ayesha and took her to his home 3 years later, i.e. one year after Hijra. But until she grow up he married Umm Salama.

In another part Ayesha claims that as long as she remembers her parents were always Muslims.

Sahih Bukhari Volume 5, Book 58, Number 245

Narrated 'Aisha:
(the wife of the Prophet) I never remembered my parents believing in any religion other than the true religion (i.e. Islam),

If Ayesha was older i.e. 18 or 20 as the Con and some Muslims claim, she would have remembered the religion of her parents prior to becoming Muslims.

Now someone like the Con may still claim that all these hadithes are lies. You are free to say whatever they want. But truth is clear like the Sun for those who have eyes.

No sane person would be aroused by a 9-year-old child. Decent people wince at the thought of this shameful act. Yet some Muslims deny them. The question is why so many followers of Muhammad would fabricate so many false hadithes about the age of Ayisha, which incidentally confirm each other?

I can tell you why people would attribute false miracles to their prophet. There are many absurd miracles attributed to Muhammad in the hadiths, despite the fact that he denied being able to perform any miracles. But why should anyone fabricate a lie about the age of Ayisha that would portray his Prophet as a Rapist-pedophile?

Even if we assume the Con narrative to be accurate, we have no reason to give it more weight than those that are so detailed about Aisha "s age, describing her, playing with her dolls and with her little friends who hid when Muhammad entered the room, her memories of playing on the swing when her mother called her and washed her face and took her to Muhammad, her ignorance of what was going on when Muhammad took off his pants and her "surprise" when got into action. These events are more likely to be remembered by child than when a particular Surah was revealed. It is more likely that a person confuse one Surah with the other than confuse all those details of her own life. This site continues:

So according to the Con hadith approach Muhammad married Aisha without her consent when she was 6 year old with overwhelming evidence I presented. Thus, Muhammad raped her! The Con claims are thoroughly rebutted and dismantled. The only sad thing there is that the Con vilified and berated Hisham. He even accused him of suffering from unbalanced memory like someone suffering from Amnesia(loss of memory). The Con should be grateful he's not living in core Islamic countries like Pakistan, Iran, Iraq or Afghanistan, because he may lose his head for such statement.

In the Con's commonsense-approach he said:

"It is apparent that the pro keeps throwing on our face that Aisha did not consent to her marriage (WHICH NO EVIDENCE HAS BEEN PRESENTED OR WILL BE). The pro has no backing for age of consent, I had tried to borrow him sense from his bible on the age of consent and also from history, but he said it is "red herring""fine. So now, since the pro cant provide an age of consent according to any law (used in the past) (divine or constitutional). We shall assume that with his baseless arguement, any age a lady got married is rape. So by this, we can say as I am typing this (which is at the middle of the night), the pro"s father is probably raping his mummy. I am not sorry to say this because this is his implication of his argument. YOUR DAD IS A CRIMINAL (A RAPIST) BY YOUR DEFINITION. WOW!
CAN WE SAY THE SAME ABOUT MY DAD AND MUHAMMED?
My dad is a muslim, so is Muhammed so they both follow the injunction of quran which says.........."

The abovementioned statement of the Con is nothing but an attack on my person(ad hominem), vituperations, vilify, attack on my family and insults. The Con should have shown a lot of decorum, courtesy and civility here. I'm disappointed in you sir.

Let me quickly address some of the relevant issues there. I have proven Aisha didn't gave her consent to the wedding. She is too young to understand what a demanding institution like marriage was. Hence, Muhammad took advantage of her parents blind devotion and Ayesha na"vet". If a man sleep with a woman without her consent it is rape. Aisha was not even a woman. She's was a minor who was playing gently on a swing before she was taken to Muhammad to devour.

I don't even need to produce any age consent in the past since we are dealing with Islam. And according to Islam a lady consent must be sought before marrying her off. Was Ayesha consent ever sought? Even if sought, how can a six year old make a decision of her own? It is not just an ordinary decision but a lifetime decision like marriage. This is rape. Muhammad raped Ayesha.

The Con also quoted a Quran passage that has nothing to do with the debate. Quran 4:6 is talking about orphans, how Muslims should spend, when an orphan should be given a property of her own. How does this add to the debate? Moreover, is Aisha an orphan?

I'd like to cite another episode of rape in Muhammad's time. Muhammad was asked about coitus interruptus in particular:

"O Allah's Apostle! We get female captives as our share of booty, and we are interested in their prices, what is your opinion about coitus interruptus?" The Prophet said, "Do you really do that? It is better for you not to do it. No soul that which Allah has destined to exist, but will surely come into existence." (Bukhari 34:432)

As indicated, the prophet of Islam did not mind his men raping the women, provided they ejaculated within the bodies of their victims.

Let me ask the Con, was there any consent of the slaves captured by Muhammad and his gangsters before they slept with them? Isn't this rape?

Arabs used to betroth their children at small age. They were both of similar age. The actual marriage took place when both children were adult. This practice of old men marrying small children started with Muhammad, whom Muslims regarded as the best example to follow.

Furthermore, assuming this was an old practice of the Arabs as the Con said, is it something good? It is certainly a despicable act. A child has not the mental capacity to decide for her future and forcing her to marry someone whom she has not chosen is violation of her human rights, especially if the man is old enough to be the girl"s grandfather. I am not going to even talk about the harm done to her body as I believe any sane person know that already. The question is why instead of condemning this evil practice Muhammad practiced it? By doing so he made that evil practice a sunna for his benighted followers.

The legal age of marriage in all European countries is 18. The only two countries that allow the minimum age of 16 are Albania and Malta, both influenced heavily by Islamic culture. Again, we are talking of an old man"s sexual relationship with a child. That is not the same for two teens loving each other and fooling around. It is normal for two teens falling in love. But it is not normal for a 50 year old man lusting for a 6-year old child. This is rape!

The age of consent worldwide ranges between 18 and 21 with very few exceptions that allow marriage at 16.

http://en.wikipedia.org...

You said how can we judged past event with the present. If we are not allowed to make such judgment then we can"t judge the crimes of any historic figure. One who is unable to know this act is evil is not worth to be called a rational person.

Moreover, this is not about the past. Muslims regard Muhammad as the best example to follow for all times. So children are raped in all Islamic countries every day in the 21st century because Muhammad did it in the 7th century.

The funniest part is that playing with dolls are prohibited in Islam, Muhammad did not object that she plays with her dolls because she had not reached the age of puberty when the "prophet" took her to his bed. She was playing dolls and Muhammad wanted to rape her.

Finally, the Con appeal to red herring again by diverting our attention to Jewish scripture. Even Hagar, the woman in question was an ADULT not a kid like Aisha who couldn't make her own decisions. Your analogy is wrong. We are talking about child rape not consensual intercourse between two consenting adults.

I have said it earlier that Muhammad followers were mute because they believed he was living according to the ordain of Allah. They never knew Muhammad only used his god to ride them and kick them like football. When Muhammad asked for Aisha's hand in marriage Abu Bakr protested that he was like a brother to Muhammad but Muhammad outsmart him with divine excuses. If they never raised any flag it was because they've submitted their intelligence and sold their conscience to Muhammad. How dare them question the messenger of Allah?

How he got away with it? He claimed to be a prophet and as such put himself above the scrutiny of mortals. Who dared to question Allah and his messenger? He had control over the life and death of the people in Medina. He acted very much like Jim Jones in his Jonestown in Guyana where he could sleep with any woman he pleased, and like David Korsh in his compound, where he had sex with every woman and even with the teenaged daughters of his followers while prohibiting them to touch their own wives.

Conclusion: I have proven beyond reasonable doubts that Muhammad raped Aisha a girl of 9 when he was 54. There's no consensual sex between a 54 year old man and a minor of 9 year old. It is rape. Calling Muhammad sexual intercourse "consummation of marriage is evil and diabolical'.

Only sick people find children sexually attractive by raping them and call it marriage. We should ask ourselves, can we betroth our daughter of 6 year old to a wretched man in his 50's for marriage? If we can't why should we forgive Muhammad for this despicable act?

Muhammad is hereby found guilty on three count charges viz

1. Rape 2.Child molestation 3. Pedophilia

When we say Muhammad raped a 9 year old child, Muslims brush it away and bring all sorts of excuses to justify this shameful act. This is the nature of blind faith and cognitive dissonance. Maybe by visualizing it, some of them will would come to their senses and realize how evil what Muhammad did was.

The Con should stop telling us Muhammad only did what others did in his time. Yes, we should not compare the customs of the primitive and tribal societies with the customs of the modern and advanced societies of today. But why should we emulate them? Why should we follow them? Why should we accept their prophet who was incapable to break away from that primitiveness, barbarity and savagery?

If the Prophet was truly a prophet, he would have acted differently. He would have not followed the customs of his primitive society but would have set a new standard. If he followed the example of his primitive society why are we following him? On one hand the Muslims of the world study Muhammad"s life meticulously, try to imitate him in everything he did. They dress like him, shave like him, walk like him and talk like him, do as he did and live as he lived. They believe everything he did, was ordained by God and he was sent to be the example to all humanity. Yet you say that he did just what his ignorant and primitive society used to do and we should forgive his sins because he was just a victim of that society.

Hence, I have proven Muhammad raped Aisha!!!

I remain cordially yours

Regards!!!
Debate Round No. 4
No comments have been posted on this debate.
No votes have been placed for this debate.