The Instigator
YassineB
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Envisage
Con (against)
Winning
14 Points

The Marriage Between Prophet Muhammad & Aisha Is Good.

Do you like this debate?NoYes-5
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 6 votes the winner is...
Envisage
Voting Style: Open with Elo Restrictions Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/10/2015 Category: Society
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 9,508 times Debate No: 69768
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (313)
Votes (6)

 

YassineB

Pro

This debate is impossible to accept, if you’re interested please let me know in the comment section.



Resolution:


- Good: healthy, sound, beneficial, favourable & decent ; not harmful, not defective, not unethical & not immoral.

- This debate will assume the Majority Position about the age of Aisha: 6 yo at her Marriage, & 9/10 yo when she moved in with Muhammad.



Rules:


- Unsupported offensive claims, insults, accusations & hate speech is not allowed, & will result in my automatic win. Once my opponent accepts the debate, he/she thereby agrees to these terms, & will be subject to them.

- The BOP is shared, where it is required to establish to a sufficient degree the propriety: Good for Pro, & Not Good for Con (concerning the said Marriage that is).

- Arguments are required to be taken to their full conclusions, suggestions & questions will be inadmissible.



Structure:


- Round 1: Acceptance.

- Round 2, 3, 4: Arguments & Rebuttals, plus Closing Argument.

- 4 Rounds, 10,000 characters each.




Best of Luck.

Envisage

Con

No way I am passing this debate up!

Best of luck Pro.
Debate Round No. 1
YassineB

Pro

Due to the limited space I have, I am going to concentrate on this round on laying out the story of the Marriage, & I’ll leave the argumentation for the next rounds. Also, the reports I am going to provide are just samples of a much greater & richer story, again, there is not much space.



This will be the Outline of my Argument:


> The Marriage as a Union.

> The Marriage as Love.

> The Marriage as a Relationship.

> The Marriage as a Function.

> The Marriage as a Legal Precedence.

> The Marriage as a Legacy.




The Marriage as a Union:



- Aisha was betrothed to Muhammad at age of 6/7 when her father Abu Bakr & her future husband were still in Mecca, & she joined her husband in his home 3 years later, 8 months after they arrived in Medina.


- It was not a custom for Arabs then to marry their daughters to their closest friends, for they considered it a form of incest. However, Muhammad introduced this practice & created relations of affinity (in-laws ties) with his four closest friends & advisers: Abu Bakr, Umar, Ali, Uthman, which brought them even closer together, & gave them access directly to the household of Muhammad.

> Abu Bakr’s daughter Aisha married Muhammad.

> Umar’s daughter Hafsa married him too.

> Muhammad’s daughter Fatima married Ali.

> Muhammad’s daughters Umm Kalthum & Ruqyya.

=> These four are the 4 successors of Muhammad, & founder of the Islamic Empire, called: the Four Rightly Guided Caliphs.


- Abu Bakr, Aisha’s father, was the closest friend of Muhammad before his Revelation year 609, until his death 632, & they knew each other since they were 10 yo & 12 yo respectively,

> He was the first adult male to believe in Muhammad & convert to Islam.

> He was the most instrumental of Muhammad’s companions in the spread of his cause, for he assisted the conversion of 7 of the Ten Promised Paradise (the 10 most important of all the companions), & assisted Muhammad in all his activities.

> He was his most trusted adviser, for Muhammad always consulted him, & always took his opinion over any other’s.

> He was his companion even during the Hijra (Migration to Medina), which is mentioned even in the Qur’an: ““If you help not (your leader), (it is no matter): for Allah did indeed help him, when the Unbelievers drove him out: he had no more than one companion [Abu Bakr]; they two were in the cave, and he said to his companion: "Have no fear, for Allah is with us” “ (9:40)

> Among the many praises Muhammad bestowed on Abu Bakr, he said: "If I were to take a Khalil, I would have taken Abu Bakr, but he is my brother and my companion”. [ Khalil in Arabic is the highest degree of friendship & Love, ^al-Bukhari #3656 ]

> Aisha reports that from the time she could remember Abu Bakr & Muhammad visited each other at least twice a day, until the day Muhammad died.


=> Needless to say, the relationship between Abu Bakr & Muhammad was almost perfect, it only needed an actual family tie: Affinity (in-laws), & that’ll finally be realised through the Union of Aisha & Muhammad.


- 'A'isha reported:

I asked Allah's Messenger about a virgin whose marriage is solemnised by her guardian, whether it was necessary or not to consult her. Allah's Messerger said: “Yes, she must be consulted”. 'A'isha said: I told him that she feels shy, whereupon Allah's Messenger said: “Her silence implies her consent”.

[ Muslim #1420 ]


- Abu Salama reported:

I asked 'A'isha: What is the amount of Dower of Allah's Messenger? She said: It was twelve 'uqiyas and one nash. (The Dower is the amount of money given to the bride, by the groom, upon marriage. In this case the Dower give by Muhammad to Aisha amounts to 500 Dirhams = ~7,000$ in today’s money)

[ Muslim #1426 ]



=> The Union between Aisha & Muhammad was based on the consent & appreciation of all parties, the bride, the groom, & the guardian. & it constituted one of the most powerful Unions in the founding of Islam, if not the most powerful & important Union.




The Marriage as a Love Story:



- Anas reported:

“The first love story of Islam was that of Muhammad & Aisha”


- Narrated `Amr bin Al-As:

The Prophet deputed me to read the Army of Dhat-as-Salasil. I came to him and said, "Who is the most beloved person to you?" He said, " Aisha." I asked, "Among the men?" He said, "Her father.”

[ Bukahri #4358 ]


- Aisha used to say: “My beloved” when she talks about Muhammad:

Eg. Aisha was asked: ‘O mother of believers, what is your opinion of Henna’? She (Aisha) said: “My beloved peace be upon him liked its color but disliked its odor, but it’s not unlawful for you”

[ Ahmad #2409 ]


-'Aishah said:

“I would eat flesh from a bone when I was menstruating, then hand it over to the Prophet and he would put his mouth where I had put my mouth: I would drink, then hand it over to him, and he would put his mouth (at the place) where I drank.”

[ Muslim 300 ]


- Narrated Anas:

The Prophet said, "The superiority of Aisha to other ladies is like the superiority of Tharid to other kinds of food."

[ Bukhari #5428 ]

=> Metaphor, similar to: ‘the cream of the crop’, something like that.


- 'A'isha reported:

“Never did I feel jealous of any wife amongst the wives of Allah's Apostle as I feel in case of Khadija (though I had never seen her), for he praised her very often.”

[ Muslim #2435 ]



=> All these speak of the deep & lasting Love shared between Muhammad & Aisha.




The Marriage as a Relationship:



- The Prophet said: "The best of you is the one who is best to his wife, and I am the best of you to my wives."

[ Bukhari #1977 ]


- 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 Messenger used to enter (my dwelling place) they used to hide themselves, but the Prophet would call them to join and play with me.”

[ Bukhari #6130 ]


- Narrated Al-Aswad:

I asked Aisha what did the Prophet use to do at home. She replied. "He used to keep himself busy serving his family and when it was time for the prayer, he would get up for prayer."

[ Bukhari #6039 ]


- Narrated Aisha:

The Prophet used to (put) bend his head (out) to me while he was in I’tikaf in the mosque during my monthly periods and I would comb and oil his hair.

[ Bukhari #2028 ]


- Narrated Abu Salama:

Aisha the wife of the Prophet said, "I used to sleep in front o Allah's Messenger and my legs opposite to his Qibla (while he is praying) and in prostration he'd push my legs and I’d withdraw then and when he stands, I’d stretch them.”

[ Bukhari #382 ]


- Aisha reported:

“I remember the Messenger of Allah standing on the door of my apartment screening me with his mantle enabling me to see the sport of the Abyssinians as they played with their daggers in the mosque. He kept standing for my sake till I was satiated and then I went back; and thus you can well imagine how long a girl tender of age who is fond of sports could have watched it.”

[ Muslim #892 ]


- Narrated An-Nu'man ibn Bashir:

When Abu Bakr (Aisha’s father) asked the permission of the Prophet to come in, he heard Aisha speaking in a loud voice.

So when he entered, he caught hold of her in order to slap her (for her bad behaviour), and said: ‘Do I see you yelling at the Messenger of Allah?’ The Prophet began to shield her from her father; Abu Bakr went out angry (at his daughter). When he left, the Prophet said (to Aisha): “You see I rescued you from the man” (trying to please her).

Abu Bakr waited for some days, then asked permission of the Messenger of Allah to enter, and found that they had made peace with each other. He said to them: ‘Bring me into your peace as you brought me into your quarrel.’

The Prophet said: “It is thus done”.

[ Abi Dawud #4999 ]


- Narrated Aisha,:

“While I was on a journey along with the Messenger of Allah, I had a race with him and I outstripped him on my feet. When I became fleshy, (again) I had a race with him and he outstripped me. He said: “This is for that outstripping.”

[ Abi Dawud #2578 ]


- Narrated Aisha:

I used to look down upon those ladies who had given themselves to Allah's Messenger and I used to say, "Can a lady give herself (to a man)?" But when Allah revealed: "You (O Muhammad) can postpone (the turn of) whom you will of them (your wives), and you may receive any of them whom you will; and there is no blame on you if you invite one whose turn you have set aside (temporarily).'I said (to the Prophet): "I feel that your Lord hastens in fulfilling your wishes”

[ Bukhari #311 ]


- Narrated Aisha:

That Allah's Messenger said to her, "I know when you are pleased with me or angry with me." I said, "Whence do you know that?" He said, "When you are pleased with me, you say, 'No, by the Lord of Muhammad,' but when you are angry with me, then you say, 'No, by the Lord of Abraham.' " Thereupon I said, "by Allah, I in fact leave your name (when I am annoyed with you).”

[ Bukhari #5228 ]

- Narrated Aisha:

“I used to wash the traces of Janaba (semen) from the clothes of the Prophet and he used to go for prayers while traces of water were still on it (water spots were still visible).”

[ Bukhari #229 ]


- Narrated Aisha:

“The Prophet and she used to perform ablution together for prayer.”

=> All these speak of the Healthy & Good Relationship between Aisha & Muhammad.

Envisage

Con

I thank Yassine for this debate.

Framework
Pro has done much of the framing for me, this I need to demonstrate that on balance, the marriage between Aisha & Muhammad was probably not:

“healthy, sound, beneficial, favourable & decent ; not harmful, not defective, not unethical & not immoral.”

The ethics of this may take a subjective flavour, but given the extreme nature of the marriage between Muhammad & Aisha, then my arguments will almost certainly have enough scope to negate on a moral level. I will be affirming a form of consequentialism in this debate, which given the profound religious impact that Muhammad has made to this day, will include modern day consequences. Pro did not made that distinction and it seems appropriate to assess the marriage in its full light.

I will begin constructive in this round and refute Pro’s arguments in the following.

P1. Overview of the Marriage
Aisha married Muhammad when she was six, consummated (first sexual intercourse) at nine or ten and Muhammad died when she was nineteen, thus the marriage lasted at most thirteen years. The marriage was a betrothal (arranged marriage). Moreover the marriage was polygamous, for Muhummad had several wives at the time.[http://en.wikipedia.org...]

Narrated Bakada : “The Prophet used to visit all his wives in a round, during the day and night and they were eleven in number.” Sahih Bukhari 1:5:268

While there is controversy over the exact number, a safe figure above nine is indisputable if Pro wants to remain consistent with the reliability of the Hadith.

P2. Muhammad Had Low Mental Stability
Muhammad frequently had visions of angels and narrations to an alleged God. These are generally termed hallucinations, and thus very symptomatic of temporal lobe epilepsy, or if not that, then almost certainly another mental illness.[http://www.faithfreedom.org...] This is evident in the Qu’ran which is claimed by Muhammad to be entirely derived from his hallucinations. The Qu’ran is disjointed and contains hundreds of imperatives, such as the women beating, drowning armies(2:50), eternal torture of unbelievers (2:6-7, 2:107, 2:162), killing unbelievers (2:191-2) among hundreds of other instances including this little gem:

The only reward of those who make war upon Allah and His messenger and strive after corruption in the land will be that they will be killed or crucified, or have their hands and feet on alternate sides cut off, or will be expelled out of the land. Such will be their degradation in the world, and in the Hereafter theirs will be an awful doom” (5:33)

Thus, not only was Muhammad’s hallucinations/visions cause for questionable mental stability in the first place, the content of these hallucinations are definitely of serious concern, and anybody married to them cannot be said to have been in a healthy relationship.

P3. Muhummad & Wife Beating
Muhammad has been reported numerous times throughout the Hadiths as both endorsing wife-beating, as well as beating Aisha himself. Clearly Muhummad adheres to an outdated barbaric notion of discipline which does not respect one’s well-being, bodily autonomy and civility.

"Husbands should take full care of their wives, with [the bounties] God has given to some more than others and with what they spend out of their own money. Righteous wives are devout and guard what God would have them guard in the husbands’ absence. If you fear high-handedness from your wives, remind them [of the teaching of God], then ignore them when you go to bed, then hit them. If they obey you, you have no right to act against them. God is most high and great." (4:34)

"And take in your hand a green branch and beat her with it, and do not break your oath..."

Narrated Aisha: " He said: Was it the darkness (of your shadow) that I saw in front of me? I said: Yes. He struck me on the chest which caused me pain, and then said: Did you think that Allah and His Apostle would deal unjustly with you?." Muslim 4:2127

Narrated Jabir b. 'Abdullah: Muhammad's father-in-laws (Abu Bakr and Umar) amused him byslapping his wives (Aisha and Hafsa) for annoying him. According to the Hadith, the prophet of Islam laughed upon hearing this.” Muslim 3506

Narrated Iyas bin ‘Abd Allah bin Abi Dhubab: "Iyas bin ‘Abd Allah bin Abi Dhubab reported the Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) as saying: Do not beat Allah’s handmaidens, but when ‘Umar came to the Apostle of Allah (may peace be upon him) and said: Women have become emboldened towards their husbands, he (the Prophet) gave permission to beat them." Abu Dawad 2141

A woman complained to Aisha of the beatings she was receiving from her husband (to the extent of causing visible bruising), which when Muhammad and the woman’s husband arrived, Muhammad did not condemn or admonish the husband for the beating, but instead only spoke of the law regarding remarriage, which was thaty it was only permissible if they have had sexual intercourse, which he deduced was permissible after seeing the husband’s sons "You claim what you claim. But by Allah, these boys resemble him as a crow resembles a crow,". Moreover Aisha complains of the general level of abuse suffered by women of her religion (which was largely as a result of Muhammad):

Narrated 'Ikrima : I have not seen any woman suffering as much as the believing womenBook 72, Number 715

A1. Morality Implications

Aisha was six when betrothed, far below the age at which one can even remotely reasonably consent, and modern laws regarding criminal age of responsibility are generally set at ~ 10 years, far advances of Aisha’s six. Thus I establish two points:

  1. 1. The marriage was not with Aisha’s consent (being a betrothal)
  2. 2. The marriage Aisha couldn’t consent to

Furthermore, half of the marriage between Muhammad was when Aisha was below the age of 13, a child for all intents and purposes and still physically maturing.

Moreover, the purpose of Islamic marriage (nikah) is primarily for sex, and the definition of which is remarkably consistent through scholars. [http://wikiislam.net...] Thus we are led to conclude that Muhammad’s intentions were indeed for sexual intercourse when he married the six year old, IF his intention was not for sex then it would have been much more customary to adopt Aisha as a daughter/grand-daughter, he already had an adopted son, Zayd.[http://en.wikipedia.org...]. Thus when we consider the intent for marriage, it was primarily not for altruistic or for consideration of well-being in general, but a much more egoistic decision. Thus by virtually any moral measure, including utilitarianism, contratarianism, consequentialism the action is ruled immoral.

Thus, because Muhammad married Aisha for sexual interests, then Muhummad is by definition, a paedophile, a known mental disorder.[http://en.wikipedia.org...]

A2. Health Effects

Aisha was almost certainly had not reached puberty at the time of consummation.[http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...] Given that paedophilic sex (and in this case, it is indisputably rape) is known to lead to profound, long term negative health effects, and has been well studied. For example in the following:

Slightly more than a third of the childhood victims of sexual abuse (37.5%), 32.7% of those physically abused, and 30.6% of victims of childhood neglect met DSM-III-R criteria for lifetime PTSD.”[ http://ajp.psychiatryonline.org...;]

To expand, in virtually every aspect of PTSD, the risk factors are increased tremendously, especially when sex is taken into account, where this essentially doubles an already massively increased risk.[ http://www.nida.nih.gov...]



Consequentialism & Knock-On Effects
When analysing the marriage in a consequentialist context, it is clear the marriage has far-reaching negative consequences. Today, child marriage in several countries that enforce Shari’ia is permitted, such as Iran,[ http://www.iranian.com...], Malaysia,[ http://www.dailyexpress.com.my...] Azerbaijan,[ https://www.cia.gov...] Bangladesh and many others.[ http://www.unfpa.org...]

The acts of Muhummad has far reaching legal consequences, in that child marriage cannot be legislated against in some instances, for example in Malaysia, the Minister of legal affairs stated:

“If the religion allows it, then we can't legislate against it.”

Thus, today we have millions of children who are being married at extremely young ages, often without their consent, in outdated ethical systems, as a direct result of Muhummad’s marriage with Aisha.

Summary
I have affirmed so far the marriage was:

1. Unhealthy
2. Unethical
3. Caused both short and long-term harm on massive scales

Moreover I have brought Muhummad's character into serious question and thus the morality of the marriage is undermined.

I leave this debate in Pro’s hands for his rebuttals.

Debate Round No. 2
YassineB

Pro

Con did not contest any of my previous arguments, I shall thus proceed where I was last. Also, much of what Con said is a series of ill supported suggestions, bold claims & bad analogies, & as per my Rules, they shall remain inadmissible until properly supported, established & taken to their full conclusions. Plus, Con’s arguments are very badly sourced, some on false accounts, others on mistranslations, others taken out of context, & others false inauthentic interpretations, which damages greatly the value of such Argument, for weak evidence will not fulfil the Sufficiency Condition required by the Resolution. & I shall address these points either on this Round or the next.


- I coudn't upload the photos directly, it didn't work for me, so I uploaded them through links:


- As I exhibited in my 2nd Round (R-2), the Marriage of Muhammad & Aisha was a blessed Union based on mutual and everlasting Love & a healthy relationship. Muhammad, even though at the time was the Ruler of a nation, its Lawmaker, its Judge & its Prophet, in the presence of his wives, he acted not as a Ruler nor as a Prophet, but rather as a loving husband.


> He used to spend his time serving his family, he used to sew his own clothes, wash them, feed his sheep, milk his goats, mend his own shoes, carry the water, clean the house. . .[1] & Aisha too used to help him out, sometimes wash his clothes & fix his hair.[2]


> He & Aisha used to spend their time talking to each-other, playing with each-other, amusing each-other, consulting each-other [3]. . . & she used to ask him questions all the time, & he would teach her all sorts of things.[4]

http://postimg.org...

> They used to do the ablution together, pray together even bathe together [5]. He used to amuse her by putting food into her mouth, and offering her to drink, & reciprocally, eat & drink from the spot where she ate & drank [6]. He used to kiss her every time he entered the house.[7]

http://postimg.org...

> He never reviled Aisha (nor any of his wives), nor caused her any harm or even yell at her, let alone hit her [8]. He did not rebuke her (or his wives) even when she (or they) act badly against him or quarrel with him. On the contrary, he defended her against her father even if she was at fault [9]. He set an example of forbearance even in the most dreadful of situations [10].

[10]

Examples of dreadful situations:

1. When a rumour spread by Abdulah Ibn Ubay (the adversary of Muhammad in Medina) where he falsely accuses Aisha of committing adultery with Safwan Ibn al-Mu’attil. Even in that extreme situation, Muhammad did nothing to her expect say: “O Aisha, I heard about you such and such, If you are innocent, then Allah will declare your innocence: but if you have committed a sin, then ask for Allah's Forgiveness and repent to him.”, & then he wen out to defend Aisha saying: “Who would exonerate me from imputations of that person [Abdullah Ibn Ubay] who has troubled (me) in regard to my family? By Allah, I find nothing in my wife but goodness and the person whom the people have mentioned in this connection is, according to my knowledge, a thoroughly pious person, and he did never get into my house but along with me.”

[Bukhari #4690]


2. The false account brought up by Con: “Muhammad’s father-in-laws (Abu Bakr and Umar) amused him by slapping his wives (Aisha and Hafsa) for annoying him.” >> It’s a false account, as it doesn’t exist, but the original story is in the Incident of Takhyir:


Context:


> The situation of muslims became better, & money started flowing in. Muhammad’s wives convened to ask him to raise their expanses. But, he, being an ascetic, could not allow his austere life style to change. While they were gather, Abu Bakr & Umar came to him, unaware of the situation. Umar noticed there is a situation between the Prophet & his wives, for everybody was silent, so he thought of breaking the silence by making a joke about marriage, so he started complaining about his wife Bint Kharija & how she asks him for more money. The Prophet laughed, for it was the same for his wives too, & he told them: “As you can see, they (the wives) are around me asking for extra expanses.”. Upon hearing this, Abu Bakr & Umar went to their daughters & squeezed their necks rebuking them. The Prophet then commands them to stop the hostility, & goes into his seclusion for 1 month.

> When he came back, he offered all his wives a choice, starting with Aisha: “Either divorce with full & handsome provision, or staying in marriage with the same austere life style as before.”

> Here, Muhammad said to Aisha: “I want to make you a proposal, & I’d like you to answer me after you consult with your parents”, when she heard it, she said: “Is it about you that I should consult my parents! Nay, I choose Allah, His Messenger [Muhammad] & the Hereafter”.


=> In both cases, the way he dealt with the whole very-tense-situation is exemplary, showing high degrees of indulgence & forbearance. He loved Aisha very much, & he was ready to let her go & reward her handsomely if she decided to leave him. & Aisha on her part chose Muhammad over wealth, instantly, without even consulting her parents.



Marriage as a Legacy:


1- Aisha’s position in the Scholarly realm after the death of the Prophet Muhammad:


http://postimg.org...

http://postimg.org...




Rebuttals:


Narrated Aisha: " He said: Was it the darkness (of your shadow) that I saw in front of me? I said: Yes. He struck me on the chest which caused me pain, and then said: Did you think that Allah and His Apostle would deal unjustly with you?." Muslim 4:2127


- This Hadith, in fact, corroborate the Good nature of the Marriage, & not the opposite. The story goes like this:

> Muhammad was spending the night with Aisha, & when he thought she went to sleep, he discretely slipped out the door & went to al-Baqi’ to the cemetery to pray for the dead late at night.

> Aisha, being awake at the moment, thought he went to see some of his other wives. Aisha felt jealous, for it was her night, & went after him.

> When she found him at the cemetery she felt ashamed, for she has been jealous for no reason, & her husband was praying at the cemetery. & so, she hurried back inconspicuously, though he saw her black shadow.

> When Muhammad returned, he found Aisha out of breath, & asked her what happened. It was then when he said: “Was it the darkness (of your shadow) that I saw in front of me?”.

> Then he ‘struck her chest’ & assured her that he wouldn’t deal unjustly with her (spend the night with another wife during her night). The word used for ‘struck’ in the Hadith is ‘Lahada’ which means: nudge, touch, push, pinch. . . => & so Muhammad did not strike or hit Aisha purposely, that’s a mistranslation. He gave her a nudge on her chest because she was panting, which she felt.

> Muhammad then sits then teaches her how to pray for the dead.


=> Con uses a mistranslated out of context version of the Hadith. Muhammad did not strike Aisha, he gave her a nudge because she was panting. & as I mentioned before, Aisha herself says: "[He]
never laid a hand on anyone"




drowning armies(2:50)
, eternal torture of unbelievers (2:6-7, 2:107, 2:162), killing unbelievers (2:191-2)

- False claims, & I addressed this issues thoroughly in my previous debate:

http://www.debate.org...

“The only reward of those who make war upon Allah and His messenger and strive after corruption in the land will be that they will be killed or crucified, or have their hands and feet on alternate sides cut off, or will be expelled out of the land. Such will be their degradation in the world, and in the Hereafter theirs will be an awful doom” (5:33)

"Except for those who return [repenting] before you apprehend them. And know that Allah is Forgiving and Merciful." (5:34)

- Apparently Con did not bother to check the interpretation of the verse. Nonetheless, I shall explain it:

> The verse starts with “those who wage war against Allah & His messenger” => It is evident that ‘waging war against God’ can not be taken literally, for war against God is nonessential, & thus it means ‘going against Allah’s command’ by striving to ‘spread corruption in the land’. The word used to describe “those” is ‘Muharibin’ = groups who take up arms to terrorise, robe people of their properties &/or their lives. In modern terms = members of organised crimes syndicates, mercenaries, assassins, pirates, & terrorists. . .

> As the verse suggests, such gangsters/terrorists, if apprehended, shall be sentenced, by Law, to:

* Crucifixion (upon death): in case of both slaughter & plunder.

* Death: in case of slaughter.

* Cutting the hands & feet: in case of plunder.

* Expulsion: in case of terrorising only, with none of the above.

> If such gangsters/terrorists repent before they were apprehended, their punishment is thereby dropped, as the next verse decrees. Such is also the case of the penalty of Stealing, if the thief repent before being apprehended, his penalty is dropped.

Envisage

Con

Thanks Pro.

Preface

Reliability of Hadith

Pro relies heavily on the narrations of the Hadith to make his arguments, and makes no effort to:

  1. 1. Demonstrate that these Hadith are reliable
  2. 2. Make a logical progression from the narrations to the resolution

The former is important because Pro attacks my (limited) use of the Hadith by attacking it’s reliability c.f. “The false account brought up by Con: “Muhammad’s father-in-laws (Abu Bakr and Umar) amused him by slapping his wives (Aisha and Hafsa) for annoying him.” >> It’s a false account, as it doesn’t exist, but the original story is in the Incident of Takhyir”. Besides the fact this is merely a bare assertion from Pro (he makes no attempt to support his claim).

The Hadith is in the Book of Divorce of ibn al-Hajjaj’s collection.[ http://sunnah.com...

] Given that all his Hadith are of Sahih (authentic/correct) and that the collection is revered as one fo the most authentic Hadith collections, then Pro has some serious explaining to do to discredit this Hadith as inauthentic, whilst not undermining his own argument.[http://en.wikipedia.org...]

If Pro can discredit my use of the Hadith, then I can equally dismiss his Hadith out of hand until he supports his own use of them. He can’t have his cake and eat it.

Childhood Grooming & Stockholm Syndrome

While this is not directly in response to Pro’s arguments, it establish that something that is clearly immoral, indecent and harmful gives rise to virtually all of the observations Pro makes. It lowers a child’s inhibitions and leaves them more susceptible to sexual activities with the perpetrator. Given that Muhammad was marrying someone who literally could not have known him on a romantic or sexual level (she was six…) then the fact he made such moves is unsurprising, and to be expected.

Moreover, as have too reason to expect the marriage was primarily sexual in intention due to the availability of other (more decent & less immoral) options already argued.

Furthermore, sexual abuse victims are known to carry increased degrees of empathy and sympathy for their attackers as a result of this grooming process, a phenomenon well-studied in Stockholm Syndrome in hostage situations.[http://en.wikipedia.org...]

Pro’s Case

Much of Pro’s case is full of assumptions and loose-ends. I will address most of these in their appropriate sections, but I only raise this point because Pro included this in the rules AND Pro accuses me of not making complete logical arguments. Thus, once again Pro cannot both have his cake (criticise my loose-ended arguments, which are not loose ended at all), whilst requiring the reader/voters to complete his unstated premises and arguments for him. That is just asinine.

Pro has to burden to show that Muhammad’s marriage is (on balance):

healthy,

sound,

beneficial,

favourable &

decent ;

not harmful,

not defective,

not unethical &

not immoral”

Which is a huge burden to bear since he did not include an “or” operator in the definition of “Good”, thus is committed to demonstrating all of these aspects.

Rebuttals

The Marriage as a Union:

Demonstrating the marriage as a union is insufficient to carry the resolution as already noted (it in no way afforms any of the sections of the definition of “good”). Thus Pro needs to make direct ties to this to this argument to carry any weight. Pro needs to take his arguments to their conclusion and show his logical progress, but he himself unquestionably falls foul of this with this entire line of argumentation as he has not tied it to the notion of “good”.

Moreover, this entire line of argumentation concentrates on Abu Bakr’s relationship with Muhammad, however it is implicit that such a friendship would have continues regardless of whether the marriage occurred or not, thus the function of marriage in “enhancing” said union is on dubious grounds as it is anyway.

Marriage as a Love Story

Again, this does not affirm the resolution. Even if we accepted the premise that Aisha & Muhammad were genuinely in love with each other (which is dubious), it does not show on any level that the marriage was healthy, sound, beneficial, favourable & decent ; not harmful, not defective, not unethical & not immoral”. It is indisputable that love is not the same as lust, or sexual attraction, and Pro has a long way to go to affirm the former. Human’s are capable of building sexual attractions fo many things, including inanimate objects and corpses.[ http://www.jaapl.org..., http://www.sciencedirect.com...]

Moreover given the distinction is a blurry one, it is virtually impossible for Pro or myself to affirm what the relationship was either way. We can both agree that Muhammad and Aisha were sexually attracted to each other, and this would explain virtually every single Hadith Pro presented equally well, but as a consequence, we are not committed to agree with Pro’s extension that it was love. Aisha was *six* years old when she married, and 19 when widowed, the notion that she knew what love is, as opposed to infatuation is quite frankly absurd. This is problematic for pro since none of the Hadith presented are narrated by Muhummad.

Furthermore, in accordance with Pro’s rule that “Arguments are required to be taken to their full conclusions, suggestions & questions will be inadmissiblePro commits this violation throughout this entire section, simply listing quotes and requiring the voters to fill in the logical jumps between what is stated to “The marriage was a love story” to “The marriage was good”. Just how does where one place their lips on a cup demonstrate a love story> Just how does one man’s quote that Aisha was a superior woman demonstrate a love story> just how does Aisha’s jealously demonstrate a love story>

These are all incomplete arguments, and by Pro’s own rules, are void.


The Marriage as a Relationship:


Exactly the same logical jumps made here as in the previous section. No logical progression from each of these (shotgunned out) Hadith and the notion that the Marriage was a relationship, and no progression from a relationship to a good marriage.

Moreover, as previously argued, childhood grooming is also about building a relationship with the child before sexual exploitation. Given that none of the Hadith that Pro cites are narrated by Muhammad, we do not have Muhammad’s train of thought here. We only have Aisha’s, and given that the victims of sexual abuse from childhood grooming are simply too young and naïve to understand then of course they are going to believe they are in a relationship. They simply do not know better.

This is further exemplified that childhood marriage at the time and place was regarded as more of a social norm, despite the harmful effects it is now known to have, thus we wouldn’t have expected for Aisha to say much directly negative about Muhammad anyway, given her exposed social status and culture at the time. Thus none of these “arguments” prove what Pro wants them to by any stretch of the imagination.

Counter Rebuttals

Mjuslim 4:2127

My translation is from the University of South California (translated Abdul Hamid Siddiq). [http://www.usc.edu...] Pro provides no reason to accept his translation over this one, other versions, such as one translated by Kitab Al-Salat,[http://searchtruth.com...] Moreover what is to stop me bare-asserting he is using mistranslated Hadith himself> Claims need support.

Moreover this is far from the only mention, such as Abu Dawad 2139-2142 , Sahih Muslim 3506 already mentioned, Pro has not addressed any of these.

Pro also completely misses the point of my Qu’ranic arguments, which are all written by Qu’ran, and allegedly received from his hallucinations (even worse for Pro, as these are manifest in his delusions). Thus, regardless of whether he condones or condemns these, he is nonetheless imagining/conjuring these within his mind – which raises serious questions regarding his mental stability. Someone today who is having visions of waging war against bestiality is going to have serious mental implications regardless of whether or not he condones or condemns bestiality.

Moreover when viewed in context, the meaning is pretty plain as it refers to Jews (“Children of Israel”)

The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger, and strive with might and main for mischief through the land is: execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides, or exile from the land: that is their disgrace in this world, and a heavy punishment is theirs in the Hereafter; Except for those who repent before they fall into your power: in that case, know that Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.”

Pro is simply chopping where he doesn’t like the text to begin. It’s rather unarguable that “execution, or crucifixion, or the cutting off of hands and feet from opposite sides” is going to raise some serious mental stability questions.

Pro drops all of my other arguments, so I extend them to next round where I will summarise.

Debate Round No. 3
YassineB

Pro

Thanks to Con, & good luck.



Preface
:



- All the Hadiths I mentioned are either Sound) or Good, & I’ve already sourced them.

- I did not attack the reliability of Con’s Hadith, I denied its existence, & so far Con hasn’t provided a source for this inexistent account. The original story > [1].

- The translation of “struck my chest” is inaccurate, for Aisha herself (& others) completely denied such suggestion [2].

- Verse (5:33) is interpreted exactly as I said [3]. Con is making up false & non-authoritative interpretations of his own, & thus inadmissible.




The Marriage as a:



Love Story:


- Muhammad’s & Aisha’s everlasting Love for each-other is evidenced by:


> Their own testimony [4].


> The admiration & intimacy they share [5], the manner with which they treat [6] & the sacrifices they made for each-other [7].


> The intense jealousy Aisha shows for Muhammad [8].


> He died between her neck & chest, with her saliva in his mouth, & was buried in her house [9].


> He promised her they’ll be husband & wife in Paradise [10].


> Their Love was acclaimed & known to the muslim community, even after the Prophet’s death [11].



Relationship:


- The Relationship they shared was remarkably healthy & favourable, for:


> The Prophet’s noble character with:

* Women [12].

* People [14].

* Enemies [15].

* Animals [16].


> His humbleness with [17] & graciousnes towards his wives & Aisha [19].


> They taked & listened to, knew the mood of & amused & played with each-other, even when Aisha got older [20].


> He never reviled her even if she is at fault, he instead defended her even against her father [23].


> He taught her a great deal about all aspects of life [24].



Function & Legal Precedent:


- The Marriage played an important role in the muslim community during & after the Prophet’s life:


> It laid the foundation of Marital Jurisprudence in Islamic Law [25].


> It represents the model for all muslims [26].


> Aisha was a delegate for the muslim women, & she served as intermediary between them & the Prophet [27].


> She had an influence & a presence in the community in general, even in battle [28].



Legacy:


- Aisha was eclipsed by her husband when he was alive, but shinned after his death, She:


> Was a leading scholar of the highest caliber in Jurisprudence, Qur’an, Hadith, Arabic, Poetry, History of Arabs, Genealogy, Medicine, Mathematics. . , in the entire then Islamic World [29].


> Was one of the 7 Scholars: the founding ‘fathers’ of the Islamic Tradition, each of whom had a corpus of legal opinions that amounts to volumes of paper [30].


> Was called the Polymath of Quraysh, held the highest scholarly position: Mufti of Medina, corrected legal opinions of the greatest of the companions in over 200 instances, advised for the 4 Caliphs, & lead politically & militarily the muslim Ummah [31].


> Taught over 700 scholars, 150 among the greatest of the Tabi’in, 48 of which are female scholars, 3 of the 7 Jurists of Medina (the founders of the root Islamic School of Thought) & 5 of the most renown female scholars [32].


> She was a prime defender of women's rights, & all her legal opinions concerning women have precedence over any others according to the majority of muslim scholars [33].




Rebuttals:



- Con insistently falsely supposes that the age of Aisha at marriage was 6! She was betrothed at 6/7, & the Contract wasn’t concluded until she was 9/10, when she received her Dower & moved in with Muhammad. & thus, before 9/10, she & him were strangers.



- Con is proposing, with no proof whatsoever, that the Marriage allegedly:


I- Was not with the consent of Aisha, contradicting thus her own testimony, based on the supposition that modern laws would not recognise such a consent, which is unfathomably absurd!


II- Must have been done with sexual, egoist & not altruistic intentions, because ‘Marriage’ & ‘Sex’ share the same word in Arabic (Nikah). If that wasn’t the case, then he should’ve adopted her!


III- Is actually a prison of sexual child abuse (‘indisputable rape’), where Aisha is a hostage (‘who certainly has not reached puberty’), & her husband is a lustful pedophile!



II)


1. Adoption is prohibited in Islam [34].


2. A Good marriage is not an altruistic marriage, that’s nonsense, & the opposite is not accurate either.


3. If Con was right, i.e. ‘we are led to conclude that Marriage is for Sex, because they share the same word’, then all marriages ever of Arabs & Muslims are for Sex (not just Aisha’s Marriage), which is an absurd generalisation!


4. To establish the opposite of Con’s claim >> the purpose of Marriage in Islam is clearly defined in verse 30:21 (http://quran.com...).

=> The primary reason for Marriage is tranquility & shared affection & mercy, as the verse explicitly states, & these are technically the words of Muhammad, which also conform with the relationship shared between him & Aisha.


5. One of the purposes of the Marriage Institution is indeed Sex: for the pleasure & the offspring. Without Sex, Marriage would not exist, nor will Mankind.

=> Con contradicts himself, for he aims to prove that a specific marriage is egoistic & thus immoral, because Marriage is what it is: a relationship to which Sex is a purpose!


6. To establish the opposite of Con’s claim about the Marriage allegedly being primarily for Sex: Muhammad & Aisha loved each-other, & he & her father were the best of friends.

=> Neither of these actual essential reasons for the Marriage are sex related.



III)

- To establish the opposite of Con’s claim that Muhammad allegedly married Aisha for even sex, or because she was a young virgin:


7. The configuration of his marriages is completely random, & the marital age gap is scattered from -30 to 46 [35].

=> There is no recognisable pattern to make any sort of judgement, except that he had no particular preferences at all.


8. Aisha was the only virgin among his 12 wives, some of which were much older than he was (Sawda, Rayhana, Khadija) [36].

=> Virgins were not on his mind at all, in fact, the opposite is true (11 out of 12 were not virgins), & thus virginity had nothing to do with the Marriage.


9. It was common for girls to get married at a young age (9/10). 2 out of 4 of his own daughters married between the age of 8 & 10 [37].

=> Youth had nothing in particular to do with it.


10. He himself stated the reason to marrying a virgin, which is: companionship & humour & fun [38].

=> Sex had nothing to do with it either.


11. He established relations of affinity with all 4 of his closest companions: Abu Bakr, Umar, Ali & Uthman, who ended up as his successors [39]. So, he indeed intended to marry Abu Bakr’s daughter, or marry his daughter to him to strengthen their relationship & to bring him into his household.

=> Aisha’s age or virginity couldn’t have influenced the decision of Marriage, for they weren’t even relevant to begin with.


- Furthermore:

12. The average age of puberty ranges between 8 & 12 [40], & precocious puberty can happen as early as 5 [41].

13. In this Marriage, there is indisputably no rape, for rape is prohibited in Marriage by Law, the Law Muhammad himself decreed through the Qur’an [41].

14. There was no form of abuse whatsoever [42].

15. The definitions of Pedophilia & Lust can not contradict more the character of Muhammad & the facts [43].



The Marriage:


- All Con’s arguments here are purely speculative & are based on the previously debunked misinformations:

> Aisha married at 6.

> The Marriage was for sexual reasons.


- Con uses current western modern standards & statistics to extrapolates by false analogy to the situation in 7th century Arabia, that’s absurd on all geographical, social, historical & cultural levels.


- Con’s argument is wholly straw-man, as it doesn’t discuss the actual Marriage. Our current Resolution isn’t about ‘Child’ Marriage in general, it’s about the specific Marriage between Muhammad & Aisha.



Mental Stability:


- Con suggests, with no proof whatsoever, that Muhammad was mentally unstable, for he allegedly had hallucinations, & mysteriously correlates this with the bad nature of the Marriage:


1. That’s a claim against Prophethood, which is entirely irrelevant to our topic.


2. This alleged ‘instability’ is the kind that perpetually shaped, the most, Human History, the kind that dominates virtually all aspects of life of 1/3 of the Human race then & 1/4 now, the kind that bends to its will the minds of countless greatest intellectuals in History, from all fields of knowledge. . .


3. Con’s last ‘argument’ is like saying James Madison’s marriage was bad because he drafted the 2nd Amendment!



Wife Beating & Child Marriage:


- Of the 5 Universal Maxims of Islamic Law, there is [44]:

> Hardship begets ease.

> Harm should be removed.

> Norms are legally binding.

=> Any argument or Hadith that Con may come up with based on norms, preventing harm, or mitigating hardship is thereby refuted, for Islamic Law already abides by them [45].


- As for beating: it’s pending for wife against husband (no particular rules), & it’s unlawful for husband against wife, unless divorce is the only other choice, & if necessary, then in a light manner (such as with a pen or brush) [46].




Conclusion:


- Muhammad & Aisha’s Union was sound & decent, their Relationship was healthy & favourable, their Marriage was beneficial to themselves, their families, their community, & to all muslims ; it was not harmful, not defective, not unethical, nor immoral.


- Con’s entire line of reasoning is utterly incoherent & unintelligible, a series of unsupported claims, void suggestions, inaccurate evidence, false analogies, absurd conclusions, & completely off topic.




Sources:

http://goo.gl...

Envisage

Con

Thanks Pro.

Preface:

Sourcing

Virtually no sources were provided last round for the claims he makes, thus most of his claims are bare assertion fallacies. I included the version of Con’s sources as a pdf file the way I can currently see it an hour before my deadline, as such it would be unreasonable to expect other sources. Only references 1-9 are sources, all the others are unsourced, and thus should be treated as bare assertions.[ http://en.wikipedia.org...]

Arguments

Recall the rules:

Arguments are required to be taken to their full conclusions, suggestions & questions will be inadmissible.”

Pro has taken none of his arguments (Marriage is a Union, Love Story, Relationship, Legacy) to their full conclusions, relying entirely on assumed premises to get to where he wants. Recall the definition of “good”:

healthy, sound, beneficial, favourable & decent ; not harmful, not defective, not unethical & not immoral”


Even worse for Pro was how he attacked me in round 3:

Also, much of what Con said is a series of ill supported suggestions, bold claims & bad analogies, & as per my Rules, they shall remain inadmissible until properly supported, established & taken to their full conclusions.

Pro cannot have his cake and eat it. That’s applying a double standard otherwise.

Hadith Reliability

Pro commits the bare assertion fallacy(again):

All the Hadiths I mentioned are either Sound or Good, & I’ve already sourced them.”

I sourced my Hadith too, and I equally claim they are sound or good. Thus by Pro’s logic, they stand as reliable. Also Pro provides no evidence for the absence of the Sahih Muslim Hadith, and his reference is completely irrelevant to this matter.

Defence of Positive Case

i.) Strawmen

Pro spends extensive time attacking me alleged argument that Muhammad married Aisha because she was a virgin. I never made such an argument, thus this was an attack on a strawman (Ctrl-F my arguments for “virgin” and you will find no results)

A2. Marriage Was Unhealthy

Muhammad had mental health problems

Demonstrating Muhammad has mental health problems consequently demonstrates the marriage as unhealthy

i.) Hallucenations

Pro largely drops my arguments that Muhammad experienced regular hallucinations, note that I made two line of arguments stemming from these hallucinations:

1.The fact Muhammad was having regular hallucinations is significant evidence of Muhammad’s questionable mental health
2.The content of these hallucinations is even more significant evidence of Muhammad’s questionable mental health

He hallucinations we have reported in the Qu’ran only make for the hallucinations that Muhammad reported about, for all we know Muhammad had more hallucinations than reported (which would be unsurprising given his rich reported portfolio of them that consist of the Qu’ran).

Hallucenation Content

Pro completely ignores that I provided strong reasons to believe that Muhammad was most likely suffering from temporal lobe epilepsy, since many of Muhammad’s symptoms are representative of this disorder. Moreover Pro only answers with incredulity that Muhammad was a paedophile which is a paraphilia – another mental disorder.

Con suggests, with no proof whatsoever, that Muhammad was mentally unstable, for he allegedly had hallucinations, & mysteriously correlates this with the bad nature of the Marriage”

1. The entire Qu’ran is evidence of Muhammad’s hallucinations, all 60,000 words of it. Muhammad himself affirms he was having visions

Qu’ran 53:4-9

"It is a revelation which has been revealed to him (4) and taught to him by the great mighty one (5) One strong, then he stood straight (6) and he appeared on the uppermost horizon (7) He then came nearer and nearer (8) until he was as close to him as the distance of two bows, or even less. (9)"

It is pretty much undisputed in Islamic circles that Muhummad indeed was having visions (i.e)

“Verse (5:33) is interpreted exactly as I said [3]. Con is making up false & non-authoritative interpretations of his own, & thus inadmissible.”

Pro provided no reason to prefer his reading of the verse over a plain reading of the verse, he provides no sources or evidence to believe his claim, and thus we can reject this as another bare assertion. Moreover, it’s largely irrelevant, even if we accept a different interpretation, it still damages the credibility of Muhammad’s mental integrity.

Furthermore, Pro completely drops my arguments that the Qu’ran advocates for drowning armies(2:50) , eternal torture of unbelievers (2:6-7, 2:107, 2:162), killing unbelievers (2:191-2). He attempts to cite his old debate (which does not address those verses whatsoever) which is insufficient regardless. Thus, the weight of evidence is against Muhammad being of sound mind.

ii.)Muhammad Was A Pedophile/Pedophilic Marriage

I established in the early rounds that the marriage was a paedophilic one, which again render’s Muhammad’s mental health dubious, and the entire relationship dubious since Aisha was far too young to understand nor consent on any meaningful level. I only presented the legal ages as a comparative device, it goes without saying that Aisha lacked any autonomy regarding the marriage arrangement (thus, arranged marriage).

Pro shoots himself in the foot when he affirms that Aisha didn’t even see Muhammad for the first few years, since that’s an obvious restriction on her autonomy. Pro attempts to deny this:

The definitions of Pedophilia & Lust can not contradict more the character of Muhammad & the facts”

Perhaps a medical definition of paedophilia will suffice:

“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”[ http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com...]

Muhammad clearly not only had sexual urges, but he also acted upon those urges, clearly fulfilling the definition of a paedophile.

Pro attempts to appeal to the status quo at the time, but how is this anything more than an ad populum fallacy ? It simply follows that most relationships at the time, including all the child marriages were unhealthy and hence, not good.

iii.) Health Consequences of Child Sex

Pro completely ignores my arguments for negative health effects of child sex, which Muhammad married and consummated in spite of the risks. Thus, it is clear that Muhammad’s intentions were not platonic.

iv. Other Options

Even if adoption is prohibited by Islamic law today, there is no reason to assume it was the case when Muhammad lives, also he already had an adopted son, which Pro completely ignored.


A1. Marriage Was Immoral

Pro drops all my arguments for consequentialism, and completely ignores my arguments for the effects in the present day Islamic world, where millions of children are still being married off at extremely young ages as a direct result of Muhammad’s marriage to Aisha. In Some cases it simply cannot be legislated against *explicitly because of Muhammad’s marriage*. This is important to anyone who wants to buy Pro’s argument that Aisha had a legacy as a result of marriage, since they must weigh the consequences both good and bad. The marriage may well have given one woman a legacy, but at the cost of the suffering of millions of children today. This value judgement is an easy one.

P3. Wife Beating

Pro drops my argument that the Qu’ran allows for Wife beating in 4:34, which was one of Muhammad’s hallucinations, thus it follows that Muhammad advocates for wife-beating on some level. Pro disputed my Sahih Muslim Hadith 2127 (already addressed), but completely drops my other Hadith arguments (Sahih Muslim 3506 and Abu Dawad 2141).Thus, on balace Pro drops most the main poins of this argument.

Rebuttals to Pro’s Case

Overview

Pro’s case is a complete mess. He had to demonstrate that the marriage was healthy, sound, beneficial, favourable & decent ; not harmful, not defective, not unethical & not immoral” however his arguments for such have not been comprehensive in the least and very much undeveloped. Anyone can go and cherry pick stories, and so to make a story one needs to actually provide a logical progression, which Pro has spectacularly failed to do this debate.


Pro has not addressed any of the ethical, moral, health, or favorability aspects of the marriage. He has not made the argument that having the marriage would have been better than not having it. Pro's case is simply verbose and incomplete. A lot was said but very little was actually demonstrated.

Conclusion
On the balance of dropped arguments, and the generally weak case of my opponent, the resolution is not only upheld, but negated. pro did not demonstate the marriage was good on any level except perhaps legacy, which runs into significantly worse consequentialist dconsiderations. As such, a Con vote is necessary.

I thank pro for this debate. It has been fun.
Debate Round No. 4
313 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by RXR 2 years ago
RXR
It was normal back then for men to marry children. How do you justify calling someone a padeophile when it was his culture ?
Posted by Pro4life 2 years ago
Pro4life
This is very very very interesting indeed.
http://www.debate.org...

In that debate Envisage won and in this debate Envisage won again. I am intrigued to know what factors involved here even though Envisage fought for the opposite views.
Posted by YassineB 2 years ago
YassineB
- Chapeau ;)
Posted by Varrack 2 years ago
Varrack
You zero your vote by voting again, but not awarding points to anyone.
Posted by wrichcirw 2 years ago
wrichcirw
BS
"However, YassineB, harassing voters to the point where they would consider removing their vote is a clear violation of the TOS."

YB
"- He sent me a PM first, I then responded to him & asked him about his Vote, he then said: "stop harassing me", & I said: "Bye then". He then came in here whining!"

This is comically bad moderation. If TBR doesn't want to be bugged via PM on this, he can either stop thread or just block YB. If he doesn't want to comment publicly on his vote, he can just stop talking to YB and let his vote stand. For moderators to threaten YB over this is abuse of power and unfair and preferential treatment given towards someone who doesn't need it nor deserve it.

If anyone is "harassing" someone here, it's bluesteel harassing yassineB, and in a threatening manner at that.
Posted by TBR 2 years ago
TBR
YassineB, I have changed my source vote. This comes with some things I would like to say.

1)The method of sourcing off-site, and additional issues I pointed to are valid (translation etc.). I see you have done the same in another debate. This, to me, breaks the spirit of the word limit and generally is an issue for you. Your problems with Envisage sources don't make yours better.

2)Your debates are personal to you. As you are attempting to educate and change some minds about Islam, let me say this. Quibbling over this issue does nothing to win hearts and minds. I dislike almost all religions equally, but am keenly interested in reading where people are knowledgeable and interesting about religious subjects. I don"t think I will ever be inclined to read another debate you are a part of.

3)Calling people liars is a big deal to me. You accused Envisage several times. You had to justify that " all you did was dilute accusations in mounts of text.

4)I am very fair with people. The truth is, I owe Envisage the apology. You did not deserve convincing arguments tie, and I allowed you to pick at his sources after my vote. That is MY fault, and apologies to Envisage for allowing this conduct to start or continue.

5)I hope you will hear this point. Debating tough subjects is just that. Tough. When you don"t convince someone of your point (regardless if it is the subject, or about sources) berating people is not the same as convincing them.

Enjoy your unearned point.
Posted by TBR 2 years ago
TBR
@ bluesteel - I don't see how to zero the vote. Can you give me instructions?
Posted by YassineB 2 years ago
YassineB
@bluesteel

- He sent me a PM first, I then responded to him & asked him about his Vote, he then said: "stop harassing me", & I said: "Bye then". He then came in here whining!

- This whole thing is false publicity, & I am not interested. If he wanted to remove his vote, as you said, he would've done it himself, or asked you privately.
Posted by bluesteel 2 years ago
bluesteel
=========================================================================
>TBR: voter harassment report<

TBR, this is not a legitimate grounds for removing a vote. You can remove your own vote by voting zero points.

However, YassineB, harassing voters to the point where they would consider removing their vote is a clear violation of the TOS. I ask that you cease all contact with TBR about this debate. A failure to do so will result in me and airmax having a serious discussion about what to do with you, given your violation of the harassment policy.
=========================================================================
6 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Vote Placed by TBR 2 years ago
TBR
YassineBEnvisageTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: See comments
Vote Placed by FaustianJustice 2 years ago
FaustianJustice
YassineBEnvisageTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro is attempting to 'prime' voters in forum threads, and I consider 'google docs' to be a dishonest use of links to circumvent character space for the debate. I feel attempting to precondition voters through use of forum to be contrary to a good faith debate and honest voting. As such, I feel Con should be awarded conduct points for remaining 'on task' to keeping the debate where it does and doesn't belong.
Vote Placed by johnlubba 2 years ago
johnlubba
YassineBEnvisageTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: RFD in comments.
Vote Placed by Jonbonbon 2 years ago
Jonbonbon
YassineBEnvisageTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Both sides exercised conduct and S&G very well. Ultimately I have to give arguments to con. Even given that con was completely wrong about the Hadith, con also provided that the relationship was harmful and defective, which means that it was not good. The evidence about the effects of a girl marrying at that age was strong and went largely undisputed. Also, con showed that the relationship could not have been consensual based on both psychology and the fact of what the relationship was (she was betrothed, not proposed to, and a six year old doesn't have the ability to fully understand marriage in order to consent to it). I tied sources because I feel that the misinterpretations of the Hadith were balanced out by pro's refusal to challenge the evidence presented by the con and simply dismiss it as not being adequate without ever explaining why.
Vote Placed by Inquistive 2 years ago
Inquistive
YassineBEnvisageTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: I can see the love in the marriage from Pro's side. But many ethical and moral points were made by Con that shows that in this time period, the marriage was not good. Maybe in the time that the Quran and Hadith was written but not now.
Vote Placed by MrJosh 2 years ago
MrJosh
YassineBEnvisageTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: For me, arguments boiled down to the fact that Muhammad was a pedophile. This in and of itself makes the marriage bad. I award sources to CON because his sources were actual sources, not simply an external document with an unknown source. Which brings me to Conduct. I give Conduct to CON because of PRO's use of Google Documents to expand his space. There is a character limit in debates for a reason. It is dishonest to link to a document which furthers your argument when you are supposed to be linking to a source.