Total Posts:139|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Child Sexuality in Abrahamic Faiths

royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2012 11:02:43 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Please note: The function of this post is not to attack any religions. I just want to point out a fact that many Christians ignore.

It is well known that Muhammad married Aisha, a 9 year old girl. It is not well known, however, that Mary married Joseph when she was 12 and Jesus was born when she was 13. Child sexuality was common in the times of Muhammad and Mary. In fact, in some Jewish families, children as young as 3 could be married.

She married Joseph and accompanied him to Bethlehem, where Jesus was born.[3] In keeping with Jewish custom, the betrothal would have taken place when she was around 12, and the birth of Jesus about a year later.[8]

http://en.wikipedia.org...
MouthWash
Posts: 2,607
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2012 11:08:11 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/23/2012 11:02:43 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
Please note: The function of this post is not to attack any religions. I just want to point out a fact that many Christians ignore.

It is well known that Muhammad married Aisha, a 9 year old girl. It is not well known, however, that Mary married Joseph when she was 12 and Jesus was born when she was 13. Child sexuality was common in the times of Muhammad and Mary. In fact, in some Jewish families, children as young as 3 could be married.

She married Joseph and accompanied him to Bethlehem, where Jesus was born.[3] In keeping with Jewish custom, the betrothal would have taken place when she was around 12, and the birth of Jesus about a year later.[8]

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

Maybe in Islam and Christianity, but Judaism does not allow this. In the time of Jesus a lot of Jews disobeyed the laws.
"Well, that gives whole new meaning to my assassination. If I was going to die anyway, perhaps I should leave the Bolsheviks' descendants some Christmas cookies instead of breaking their dishes and vodka bottles in their sleep." -Tsar Nicholas II (YYW)
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2012 11:08:39 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Royal, that's not true because the definition of marriage is "between a man and a woman" not "man and a child." Obviously the definition of marriage cannot change. It is the word of God. Stop lying.
President of DDO
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2012 11:17:25 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/23/2012 11:08:39 AM, Danielle wrote:
Royal, that's not true because the definition of marriage is "between a man and a woman" not "man and a child." Obviously the definition of marriage cannot change. It is the word of God. Stop lying.

LOL
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2012 11:18:08 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/23/2012 11:08:11 AM, MouthWash wrote:
At 5/23/2012 11:02:43 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
Please note: The function of this post is not to attack any religions. I just want to point out a fact that many Christians ignore.

It is well known that Muhammad married Aisha, a 9 year old girl. It is not well known, however, that Mary married Joseph when she was 12 and Jesus was born when she was 13. Child sexuality was common in the times of Muhammad and Mary. In fact, in some Jewish families, children as young as 3 could be married.

She married Joseph and accompanied him to Bethlehem, where Jesus was born.[3] In keeping with Jewish custom, the betrothal would have taken place when she was around 12, and the birth of Jesus about a year later.[8]

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

Maybe in Islam and Christianity, but Judaism does not allow this. In the time of Jesus a lot of Jews disobeyed the laws.

Female children have been married off before puberty in almost every patriarchal culture. Jewish culture is no exception.
Ron-Paul
Posts: 2,557
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2012 11:23:23 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/23/2012 11:02:43 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
Please note: The function of this post is not to attack any religions. I just want to point out a fact that many Christians ignore.

It is well known that Muhammad married Aisha, a 9 year old girl. It is not well known, however, that Mary married Joseph when she was 12 and Jesus was born when she was 13. Child sexuality was common in the times of Muhammad and Mary. In fact, in some Jewish families, children as young as 3 could be married.

She married Joseph and accompanied him to Bethlehem, where Jesus was born.[3] In keeping with Jewish custom, the betrothal would have taken place when she was around 12, and the birth of Jesus about a year later.[8]

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

With regards to Mohammad, marriage yes, sexuality no.
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2012 11:24:18 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/23/2012 11:23:23 AM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 5/23/2012 11:02:43 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
Please note: The function of this post is not to attack any religions. I just want to point out a fact that many Christians ignore.

It is well known that Muhammad married Aisha, a 9 year old girl. It is not well known, however, that Mary married Joseph when she was 12 and Jesus was born when she was 13. Child sexuality was common in the times of Muhammad and Mary. In fact, in some Jewish families, children as young as 3 could be married.

She married Joseph and accompanied him to Bethlehem, where Jesus was born.[3] In keeping with Jewish custom, the betrothal would have taken place when she was around 12, and the birth of Jesus about a year later.[8]

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

With regards to Mohammad, marriage yes, sexuality no.

Muhammad consummated the marriage when Aisha was nine.
Ron-Paul
Posts: 2,557
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2012 11:25:01 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/23/2012 11:24:18 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 5/23/2012 11:23:23 AM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 5/23/2012 11:02:43 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
Please note: The function of this post is not to attack any religions. I just want to point out a fact that many Christians ignore.

It is well known that Muhammad married Aisha, a 9 year old girl. It is not well known, however, that Mary married Joseph when she was 12 and Jesus was born when she was 13. Child sexuality was common in the times of Muhammad and Mary. In fact, in some Jewish families, children as young as 3 could be married.

She married Joseph and accompanied him to Bethlehem, where Jesus was born.[3] In keeping with Jewish custom, the betrothal would have taken place when she was around 12, and the birth of Jesus about a year later.[8]

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

With regards to Mohammad, marriage yes, sexuality no.

Muhammad consummated the marriage when Aisha was nine.

I will repeat my earlier post since you have not seemed to read it.
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2012 11:25:49 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
The critics have little clue of what they're talking about. In ancient times, families would often be very poor, and girls were vulnerable in many ways. For example, it would often be necessary for them to be working their flesh out in order to help provide basic needs for their families. To avoid this misery, if they reached adolescence, they would be allowed to marry with their consent, so that they could avoid being slaves, mistreated by males who are not related to them, etc. Marriage offered them full protection.

Prophet Muhammad had several wives, and he married them because it was needed. One of his wives was a widow, and she was middle aged. "Sawda bint Zam'a, may Allah be pleased with her had been the first woman to immigrate to Abyssinia in the way of Allah. Her husband ha died and she was now living with her aged father. She was middle-aged, rather plump, with a jolly, kindly disposition, and just the right person to take care of the Prophet's household and family. So Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) gave permission to Khawla to speak to Sayyiduna Abu Bakr and to Sawda on the subject. Khawla went straight to Sawda and said, "Would you like Allah to give you great blessing, Sawda?" Sawda asked, "And what is that, Khawla?" She said, "The Messenger of Allah has sent me to you with a proposal of marriage!" - "There was great surprise in Mecca that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) would choose to marry a widow who was neither young nor beautiful." http://www.islamawareness.net...

Non-Muslim scholars who studies the life of the Prophet would often say that he was a big feminist in his era, due to all the rights he promote to women. With regard to Aisha, the marriage was done out of complete necessity, and not because of mere attraction. I've repeated this innumerable times on this site.
Ron-Paul
Posts: 2,557
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2012 11:27:43 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/23/2012 11:25:49 AM, Mirza wrote:
The critics have little clue of what they're talking about. In ancient times, families would often be very poor, and girls were vulnerable in many ways. For example, it would often be necessary for them to be working their flesh out in order to help provide basic needs for their families. To avoid this misery, if they reached adolescence, they would be allowed to marry with their consent, so that they could avoid being slaves, mistreated by males who are not related to them, etc. Marriage offered them full protection.

Prophet Muhammad had several wives, and he married them because it was needed. One of his wives was a widow, and she was middle aged. "Sawda bint Zam'a, may Allah be pleased with her had been the first woman to immigrate to Abyssinia in the way of Allah. Her husband ha died and she was now living with her aged father. She was middle-aged, rather plump, with a jolly, kindly disposition, and just the right person to take care of the Prophet's household and family. So Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) gave permission to Khawla to speak to Sayyiduna Abu Bakr and to Sawda on the subject. Khawla went straight to Sawda and said, "Would you like Allah to give you great blessing, Sawda?" Sawda asked, "And what is that, Khawla?" She said, "The Messenger of Allah has sent me to you with a proposal of marriage!" - "There was great surprise in Mecca that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) would choose to marry a widow who was neither young nor beautiful." http://www.islamawareness.net...

Non-Muslim scholars who studies the life of the Prophet would often say that he was a big feminist in his era, due to all the rights he promote to women. With regard to Aisha, the marriage was done out of complete necessity, and not because of mere attraction. I've repeated this innumerable times on this site.

+1 to this wonderful insight. I know have a new argument.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2012 11:28:51 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/23/2012 11:25:49 AM, Mirza wrote:
The critics have little clue of what they're talking about. In ancient times, families would often be very poor, and girls were vulnerable in many ways. For example, it would often be necessary for them to be working their flesh out in order to help provide basic needs for their families. To avoid this misery, if they reached adolescence, they would be allowed to marry with their consent, so that they could avoid being slaves, mistreated by males who are not related to them, etc.
Were not wives, too, property? That's certainly the historical legal reality in most places, are you saying it was in no way theologically backed, none of this obey your husband stuff?

Not that I have anything against child marriage per se.

Marriage offered them full protection.
Theoretically, would not adoption do the same thing without the sex?
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Ron-Paul
Posts: 2,557
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2012 11:31:33 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/23/2012 11:28:51 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 5/23/2012 11:25:49 AM, Mirza wrote:
The critics have little clue of what they're talking about. In ancient times, families would often be very poor, and girls were vulnerable in many ways. For example, it would often be necessary for them to be working their flesh out in order to help provide basic needs for their families. To avoid this misery, if they reached adolescence, they would be allowed to marry with their consent, so that they could avoid being slaves, mistreated by males who are not related to them, etc.
Were not wives, too, property? That's certainly the historical legal reality in most places, are you saying it was in no way theologically backed, none of this obey your husband stuff?

Not that I have anything against child marriage per se.

No.
Marriage offered them full protection.
Theoretically, would not adoption do the same thing without the sex?

How many times do I have to say this. He did not have sex with the girl.
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2012 11:33:29 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/23/2012 11:31:33 AM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 5/23/2012 11:28:51 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 5/23/2012 11:25:49 AM, Mirza wrote:
The critics have little clue of what they're talking about. In ancient times, families would often be very poor, and girls were vulnerable in many ways. For example, it would often be necessary for them to be working their flesh out in order to help provide basic needs for their families. To avoid this misery, if they reached adolescence, they would be allowed to marry with their consent, so that they could avoid being slaves, mistreated by males who are not related to them, etc.
Were not wives, too, property? That's certainly the historical legal reality in most places, are you saying it was in no way theologically backed, none of this obey your husband stuff?

Not that I have anything against child marriage per se.

No.
Do you have any evidence of this?

Marriage offered them full protection.
Theoretically, would not adoption do the same thing without the sex?

How many times do I have to say this. He did not have sex with the girl.

Or of this? Again, not that I have a problem with it per se. If he wants a little benefit for providing for her and she consents, hey, go for it... might be a little hypocritical on their part but that's different story.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2012 11:34:04 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/23/2012 11:28:51 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Were not wives, too, property? That's certainly the historical legal reality in most places, are you saying it was in no way theologically backed, none of this obey your husband stuff?
In some religions, but not Islam.

Marriage offered them full protection.
Theoretically, would not adoption do the same thing without the sex?
Yes if parents wanted to get rid of their children, which they didn't want to. You also seem to not be aware of the fact that poor people have children in order to sustain themselves financially (this is a phenomenon throughout the world even today). More people = more workforce. However, if the results of breeding were females, then they'd need to have protection and not be subject to slaveholders, so marriage helped grant this.
Buckethead31594
Posts: 363
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2012 11:35:53 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/23/2012 11:02:43 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
Please note: The function of this post is not to attack any religions. I just want to point out a fact that many Christians ignore.

It is well known that Muhammad married Aisha, a 9 year old girl. It is not well known, however, that Mary married Joseph when she was 12 and Jesus was born when she was 13. Child sexuality was common in the times of Muhammad and Mary. In fact, in some Jewish families, children as young as 3 could be married.

She married Joseph and accompanied him to Bethlehem, where Jesus was born.[3] In keeping with Jewish custom, the betrothal would have taken place when she was around 12, and the birth of Jesus about a year later.[8]

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

So? It was a marriage. Not a form of sexual slavery, don't blow things out of proportion. Culture was different, as explained by the previous posts.
"By all means, marry. If you get a good wife, you'll become happy; if you get a bad one, you'll become a philosopher." - Socrates
Buckethead31594
Posts: 363
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2012 11:37:32 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
And in response to your contention regarding 3 year-olds and marriage:

http://www.angelfire.com...
"By all means, marry. If you get a good wife, you'll become happy; if you get a bad one, you'll become a philosopher." - Socrates
Ragnar_Rahl
Posts: 19,297
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2012 11:38:03 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/23/2012 11:34:04 AM, Mirza wrote:
At 5/23/2012 11:28:51 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Were not wives, too, property? That's certainly the historical legal reality in most places, are you saying it was in no way theologically backed, none of this obey your husband stuff?
In some religions, but not Islam.

Okay, great. I'll spread the word that Islamic wives can disobey their husbands.


Marriage offered them full protection.
Theoretically, would not adoption do the same thing without the sex?
Yes if parents wanted to get rid of their children, which they didn't want to.
And why could not Islam have courts to determine that parents were neglectful?

You also seem to not be aware of the fact that poor people have children in order to sustain themselves financially (this is a phenomenon throughout the world even today).
With intent to whore them out, your previously identified means of making a living? Typically one thinks of agriculture "throughout the world" for such things.
It came to be at its height. It was commanded to command. It was a capital before its first stone was laid. It was a monument to the spirit of man.
Ron-Paul
Posts: 2,557
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2012 11:42:17 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/23/2012 11:33:29 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 5/23/2012 11:31:33 AM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 5/23/2012 11:28:51 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
At 5/23/2012 11:25:49 AM, Mirza wrote:
The critics have little clue of what they're talking about. In ancient times, families would often be very poor, and girls were vulnerable in many ways. For example, it would often be necessary for them to be working their flesh out in order to help provide basic needs for their families. To avoid this misery, if they reached adolescence, they would be allowed to marry with their consent, so that they could avoid being slaves, mistreated by males who are not related to them, etc.
Were not wives, too, property? That's certainly the historical legal reality in most places, are you saying it was in no way theologically backed, none of this obey your husband stuff?

Not that I have anything against child marriage per se.

No.
Do you have any evidence of this?

Because wives aren't property.
Marriage offered them full protection.
Theoretically, would not adoption do the same thing without the sex?

How many times do I have to say this. He did not have sex with the girl.

Or of this? Again, not that I have a problem with it per se. If he wants a little benefit for providing for her and she consents, hey, go for it... might be a little hypocritical on their part but that's different story.

The Qur'an and Hadith.
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2012 11:43:28 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/23/2012 11:38:03 AM, Ragnar_Rahl wrote:
Okay, great. I'll spread the word that Islamic wives can disobey their husbands.
Uh, none of the two parties should do that. It's because of a contract, NOT claim of property of the other.

And why could not Islam have courts to determine that parents were neglectful?
What are you talking about? It's not about being neglectful, it's about being forced to do some things. Being put in a bad position by males who aren't related to these women isn't something parents are responsible for whatsoever

With intent to whore them out,
No.

your previously identified means of making a living? Typically one thinks of agriculture "throughout the world" for such things.
I don't think you know what you're talking about here. Do you have a point to make? Come back to the adoption part sir. You need to defend that.
inferno
Posts: 10,565
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2012 11:46:07 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/23/2012 11:02:43 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
Please note: The function of this post is not to attack any religions. I just want to point out a fact that many Christians ignore.

It is well known that Muhammad married Aisha, a 9 year old girl. It is not well known, however, that Mary married Joseph when she was 12 and Jesus was born when she was 13. Child sexuality was common in the times of Muhammad and Mary. In fact, in some Jewish families, children as young as 3 could be married.

She married Joseph and accompanied him to Bethlehem, where Jesus was born.[3] In keeping with Jewish custom, the betrothal would have taken place when she was around 12, and the birth of Jesus about a year later.[8]

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

Muhammad was not considered to be of Judaism religion. All religions are man made institutions that try and define who God truly is and what he demands of us. These mariages may have been outside of the norm religiously speaking, and done out of isolated consultation. That means that any man can create his own idea of what marriage should be. Young or old, it is about control. Age is not really a legitimate issue if you are talking about old stoic ideas of matrimony. Times have changed, and in some parts of the world, this practice is common. Islamics are every hard on Women in general, and sometimes abusive. I do not deem this to be
and orthodoxed system overall in the comfines of a traditional European or Western styled religion. For the most part, many people in the modern world, are married around the age of 20 or higher. Christians are very aware of many things in the Bible and the unfond origins in the context of things written. Please, with all due respect, dont be so quick to judge.
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2012 11:49:22 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/23/2012 11:25:49 AM, Mirza wrote:
The critics have little clue of what they're talking about. In ancient times, families would often be very poor, and girls were vulnerable in many ways. For example, it would often be necessary for them to be working their flesh out in order to help provide basic needs for their families. To avoid this misery, if they reached adolescence, they would be allowed to marry with their consent, so that they could avoid being slaves, mistreated by males who are not related to them, etc. Marriage offered them full protection.

Actually, they were often married off for the good of their families. Parents would receive financial benefits for marrying off their daughters, and many parents hoped to secure good marriages for their children so that they could personally prosper. Children were ween as property. They were not told that they had a choice in the matter; in fact, they were forced into the matches against their will.
Prophet Muhammad had several wives, and he married them because it was needed. One of his wives was a widow, and she was middle aged. "Sawda bint Zam'a, may Allah be pleased with her had been the first woman to immigrate to Abyssinia in the way of Allah. Her husband ha died and she was now living with her aged father. She was middle-aged, rather plump, with a jolly, kindly disposition, and just the right person to take care of the Prophet's household and family. So Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) gave permission to Khawla to speak to Sayyiduna Abu Bakr and to Sawda on the subject. Khawla went straight to Sawda and said, "Would you like Allah to give you great blessing, Sawda?" Sawda asked, "And what is that, Khawla?" She said, "The Messenger of Allah has sent me to you with a proposal of marriage!" - "There was great surprise in Mecca that the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) would choose to marry a widow who was neither young nor beautiful." http://www.islamawareness.net...

What does this have to do with Aisha the six year old? Nothing. People can have a variety of sexual interests.
Non-Muslim scholars who studies the life of the Prophet would often say that he was a big feminist in his era, due to all the rights he promote to women.
Proof? From what I see, Islam does not protect women or give them equal rights.
With regard to Aisha, the marriage was done out of complete necessity, and not because of mere attraction. I've repeated this innumerable times on this site.
Proof that it was necessary?
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2012 11:49:51 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/23/2012 11:35:53 AM, Buckethead31594 wrote:
At 5/23/2012 11:02:43 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
Please note: The function of this post is not to attack any religions. I just want to point out a fact that many Christians ignore.

It is well known that Muhammad married Aisha, a 9 year old girl. It is not well known, however, that Mary married Joseph when she was 12 and Jesus was born when she was 13. Child sexuality was common in the times of Muhammad and Mary. In fact, in some Jewish families, children as young as 3 could be married.

She married Joseph and accompanied him to Bethlehem, where Jesus was born.[3] In keeping with Jewish custom, the betrothal would have taken place when she was around 12, and the birth of Jesus about a year later.[8]

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

So? It was a marriage. Not a form of sexual slavery, don't blow things out of proportion. Culture was different, as explained by the previous posts.

Arranged marriages are a form of sexual slavery, and children cannot consent to sex.
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2012 11:51:20 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/23/2012 11:37:32 AM, Buckethead31594 wrote:
And in response to your contention regarding 3 year-olds and marriage:

http://www.angelfire.com...

Shulchan Aruch, Even HaEzer 37:1. in this article:

http://www.askmoses.com...

Clip: In ancient (and not so ancient) times however, marriage was often-times celebrated at a rather young age. Although we do not follow this dictum, technically speaking, a girl may be betrothed the moment she is born, and married at the age of three.2 A boy may betroth and marry at the age of thirteen.3

http://www.theologyweb.com...
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2012 11:56:14 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
"That was the culture of the place" does not justify any action. The Holocaust and Fascism were part of the culture of Nazi Germany, and yet the world did not agree that those actions were just.
Mirza
Posts: 16,992
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2012 11:58:41 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/23/2012 11:49:22 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
Actually, they were often married off for the good of their families. Parents would receive financial benefits for marrying off their daughters, and many parents hoped to secure good marriages for their children so that they could personally prosper. Children were ween as property. They were not told that they had a choice in the matter; in fact, they were forced into the matches against their will.
Some parents allowed it for their benefit - but that has nothing whatsoever to do with my argument that there were other very important reasons for letting children marry. In fact, disregarding special reasons, it was considered fine because children who reached adolescence were seen as fully ready for a life in marriage. This was completely normal in old times. Nonetheless, I'm defending the proper reasons for people having let their children marry.

What does this have to do with Aisha the six year old? Nothing. People can have a variety of sexual interests.
I made the point that the Prophet married several wives for good reasons, and this includes Aisha.

Proof? From what I see, Islam does not protect women or give them equal rights.
http://www.debate.org...

Proof that it was necessary?
"As for the purpose of this marriage, it was purely for sociopolitical reason. The Prophet's main concern was the future of Islam. He was interested in strengthening the Muslims by all bonds. This also explains the reason why he married the daughter of `Umar, his Second Successor. It was by his marriage to Juwayriyyah that he gained the support for Islam of the whole clan of Bani Al-Mustaliq and their allied tribes. It was through his marriage to Safiyyah that he neutralized a great section of the hostile Jews of Arabia. By accepting Mariya, the Copt from Egypt, as his wife, he formed a political alliance with a king of great magnitude. So his marriage to `Aisha could never be of anything save cementing his relation with Abu Bakr, `Aisha's father." http://muslim-responses.com...
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2012 12:04:03 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/23/2012 11:58:41 AM, Mirza wrote:
At 5/23/2012 11:49:22 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
Actually, they were often married off for the good of their families. Parents would receive financial benefits for marrying off their daughters, and many parents hoped to secure good marriages for their children so that they could personally prosper. Children were ween as property. They were not told that they had a choice in the matter; in fact, they were forced into the matches against their will.
Some parents allowed it for their benefit
Most parents did it for their financial and political benefit.
- but that has nothing whatsoever to do with my argument that there were other very important reasons for letting children marry.
Not really.
In fact, disregarding special reasons, it was considered fine because children who reached adolescence were seen as fully ready for a life in marriage. This was completely normal in old times.
Just because it was part of the culture does not mean it is permissible. The Holocaust and Anti-Semitism were part of Nazi culture, and neither are considered just. In fact, Nazis were punished severely after World War II for their crimes.
Nonetheless, I'm defending the proper reasons for people having let their children marry.

There never were any. Those children were abused and used as sexual slaves.
What does this have to do with Aisha the six year old? Nothing. People can have a variety of sexual interests.
I made the point that the Prophet married several wives for good reasons, and this includes Aisha.

Proof? From what I see, Islam does not protect women or give them equal rights.
http://www.debate.org...

Husbands are given control over wives. Women in Islamic countries do not have political rights, and this is a recurring theme in those nations.
Proof that it was necessary?
"As for the purpose of this marriage, it was purely for sociopolitical reason. The Prophet's main concern was the future of Islam. He was interested in strengthening the Muslims by all bonds. This also explains the reason why he married the daughter of `Umar, his Second Successor. It was by his marriage to Juwayriyyah that he gained the support for Islam of the whole clan of Bani Al-Mustaliq and their allied tribes. It was through his marriage to Safiyyah that he neutralized a great section of the hostile Jews of Arabia. By accepting Mariya, the Copt from Egypt, as his wife, he formed a political alliance with a king of great magnitude. So his marriage to `Aisha could never be of anything save cementing his relation with Abu Bakr, `Aisha's father." http://muslim-responses.com...

So he did it because he wanted power? How does that make it necessary? By the way, you just proved my earlier point.
Ron-Paul
Posts: 2,557
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2012 12:05:33 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/23/2012 12:04:03 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 5/23/2012 11:58:41 AM, Mirza wrote:
At 5/23/2012 11:49:22 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
Actually, they were often married off for the good of their families. Parents would receive financial benefits for marrying off their daughters, and many parents hoped to secure good marriages for their children so that they could personally prosper. Children were ween as property. They were not told that they had a choice in the matter; in fact, they were forced into the matches against their will.
Some parents allowed it for their benefit
Most parents did it for their financial and political benefit.
- but that has nothing whatsoever to do with my argument that there were other very important reasons for letting children marry.
Not really.
In fact, disregarding special reasons, it was considered fine because children who reached adolescence were seen as fully ready for a life in marriage. This was completely normal in old times.
Just because it was part of the culture does not mean it is permissible. The Holocaust and Anti-Semitism were part of Nazi culture, and neither are considered just. In fact, Nazis were punished severely after World War II for their crimes.
Nonetheless, I'm defending the proper reasons for people having let their children marry.

There never were any. Those children were abused and used as sexual slaves.
What does this have to do with Aisha the six year old? Nothing. People can have a variety of sexual interests.
I made the point that the Prophet married several wives for good reasons, and this includes Aisha.

Proof? From what I see, Islam does not protect women or give them equal rights.
http://www.debate.org...

Husbands are given control over wives. Women in Islamic countries do not have political rights, and this is a recurring theme in those nations.
Proof that it was necessary?
"As for the purpose of this marriage, it was purely for sociopolitical reason. The Prophet's main concern was the future of Islam. He was interested in strengthening the Muslims by all bonds. This also explains the reason why he married the daughter of `Umar, his Second Successor. It was by his marriage to Juwayriyyah that he gained the support for Islam of the whole clan of Bani Al-Mustaliq and their allied tribes. It was through his marriage to Safiyyah that he neutralized a great section of the hostile Jews of Arabia. By accepting Mariya, the Copt from Egypt, as his wife, he formed a political alliance with a king of great magnitude. So his marriage to `Aisha could never be of anything save cementing his relation with Abu Bakr, `Aisha's father." http://muslim-responses.com...

So he did it because he wanted power? How does that make it necessary? By the way, you just proved my earlier point.

I noticed that you are not really disproving, just saying.
royalpaladin
Posts: 22,357
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2012 12:07:18 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/23/2012 12:05:33 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 5/23/2012 12:04:03 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 5/23/2012 11:58:41 AM, Mirza wrote:
At 5/23/2012 11:49:22 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
Actually, they were often married off for the good of their families. Parents would receive financial benefits for marrying off their daughters, and many parents hoped to secure good marriages for their children so that they could personally prosper. Children were ween as property. They were not told that they had a choice in the matter; in fact, they were forced into the matches against their will.
Some parents allowed it for their benefit
Most parents did it for their financial and political benefit.
- but that has nothing whatsoever to do with my argument that there were other very important reasons for letting children marry.
Not really.
In fact, disregarding special reasons, it was considered fine because children who reached adolescence were seen as fully ready for a life in marriage. This was completely normal in old times.
Just because it was part of the culture does not mean it is permissible. The Holocaust and Anti-Semitism were part of Nazi culture, and neither are considered just. In fact, Nazis were punished severely after World War II for their crimes.
Nonetheless, I'm defending the proper reasons for people having let their children marry.

There never were any. Those children were abused and used as sexual slaves.
What does this have to do with Aisha the six year old? Nothing. People can have a variety of sexual interests.
I made the point that the Prophet married several wives for good reasons, and this includes Aisha.

Proof? From what I see, Islam does not protect women or give them equal rights.
http://www.debate.org...

Husbands are given control over wives. Women in Islamic countries do not have political rights, and this is a recurring theme in those nations.
Proof that it was necessary?
"As for the purpose of this marriage, it was purely for sociopolitical reason. The Prophet's main concern was the future of Islam. He was interested in strengthening the Muslims by all bonds. This also explains the reason why he married the daughter of `Umar, his Second Successor. It was by his marriage to Juwayriyyah that he gained the support for Islam of the whole clan of Bani Al-Mustaliq and their allied tribes. It was through his marriage to Safiyyah that he neutralized a great section of the hostile Jews of Arabia. By accepting Mariya, the Copt from Egypt, as his wife, he formed a political alliance with a king of great magnitude. So his marriage to `Aisha could never be of anything save cementing his relation with Abu Bakr, `Aisha's father." http://muslim-responses.com...

So he did it because he wanted power? How does that make it necessary? By the way, you just proved my earlier point.

I noticed that you are not really disproving, just saying.

Mirza himself notes that Aisha was married off for social purposes.
Ron-Paul
Posts: 2,557
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/23/2012 12:08:00 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 5/23/2012 12:07:18 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 5/23/2012 12:05:33 PM, Ron-Paul wrote:
At 5/23/2012 12:04:03 PM, royalpaladin wrote:
At 5/23/2012 11:58:41 AM, Mirza wrote:
At 5/23/2012 11:49:22 AM, royalpaladin wrote:
Actually, they were often married off for the good of their families. Parents would receive financial benefits for marrying off their daughters, and many parents hoped to secure good marriages for their children so that they could personally prosper. Children were ween as property. They were not told that they had a choice in the matter; in fact, they were forced into the matches against their will.
Some parents allowed it for their benefit
Most parents did it for their financial and political benefit.
- but that has nothing whatsoever to do with my argument that there were other very important reasons for letting children marry.
Not really.
In fact, disregarding special reasons, it was considered fine because children who reached adolescence were seen as fully ready for a life in marriage. This was completely normal in old times.
Just because it was part of the culture does not mean it is permissible. The Holocaust and Anti-Semitism were part of Nazi culture, and neither are considered just. In fact, Nazis were punished severely after World War II for their crimes.
Nonetheless, I'm defending the proper reasons for people having let their children marry.

There never were any. Those children were abused and used as sexual slaves.
What does this have to do with Aisha the six year old? Nothing. People can have a variety of sexual interests.
I made the point that the Prophet married several wives for good reasons, and this includes Aisha.

Proof? From what I see, Islam does not protect women or give them equal rights.
http://www.debate.org...

Husbands are given control over wives. Women in Islamic countries do not have political rights, and this is a recurring theme in those nations.
Proof that it was necessary?
"As for the purpose of this marriage, it was purely for sociopolitical reason. The Prophet's main concern was the future of Islam. He was interested in strengthening the Muslims by all bonds. This also explains the reason why he married the daughter of `Umar, his Second Successor. It was by his marriage to Juwayriyyah that he gained the support for Islam of the whole clan of Bani Al-Mustaliq and their allied tribes. It was through his marriage to Safiyyah that he neutralized a great section of the hostile Jews of Arabia. By accepting Mariya, the Copt from Egypt, as his wife, he formed a political alliance with a king of great magnitude. So his marriage to `Aisha could never be of anything save cementing his relation with Abu Bakr, `Aisha's father." http://muslim-responses.com...

So he did it because he wanted power? How does that make it necessary? By the way, you just proved my earlier point.

I noticed that you are not really disproving, just saying.

Mirza himself notes that Aisha was married off for social purposes.

That itself disproves your argument.