Are they also publicizing their addresses and letting their insurer know they are doing so?
The cites you published, replete with hemming and hawing and “peace be upon him”, are nowhere near what I was talking about, and you know it.
In fact of course he selectively avoids quoting the entire paragraphs in the same article confirming what I already wrote. Why you piously respond as if you respond to a serious non troll…
The sole purpose of his postings is to promote as Kumquat said his racist and his bigotted views by the repetition while keeping up the civil pretenses that so easily fool the moderators on this board around these subjects.
It is to be added that in the reading of the youth presentations of Aicha, written centuries later, the precise ages can not be taken alone - in the largely illiterate society of the Arabia, largely nomadic, there is not really a precision with the numbers, it is not the modern western record keeping.
And you again fall for it and take him seriously.
He succeeds so well as you jump to his bait every time to drag the subject away from a point he knows he failed on (it started with his wild fantasy about the danger in the Morocco, look back in this thread) so failed on this demarche he drags you to this.
It is only needed to point to the record of killings and the broad violance in the USA against the muslim and the black minorities right now, since he originally fantasized that the response to saying anti-prophet things on vacation in the Morocco will be worse than the violence possible in the USA.
No! Say it isn’t so! But - you’re so erudite! There’s not the slightest whiff of a overcompensating autodidact about you at all!
But seriously, buddy - *7 years *and no paper? That is truly, truly pathetic, even for you. Do the other Triples know?
You’re a dick, but I can’t say as you’re totally wrong. It’s not something I’m super proud of. 
We call ourselves “TNSers”, or occasionally “Niners”, but yes: I have not made a secret of it. There’s a lot of variance in this area, although I’m certainly on the lower tail of the bell curve in this respect. But of the TNSers I play poker with every week, one is the director of a state’s poison control center, another is an MBA, and another has a GED.
I bet Kimstu and others just LOVE being tut-tutted over and over for not posting the way you think they ought to post. :dubious:
Cite? Yes, the U.S. is a violent country–more violent than most. But in this thread, going back a ways at this point, we have combed over the FBI statistics and found that blacks being killed by whites is not a highly prevalent occurrence in this country. We didn’t examine statistics about Muslims, but maybe you have some evidence. You have made it clear you disdain any cherrypicking of highly publicized cases as opposed to hard, statistical evidence, so I’m sure you’ll keep that in mind in your response. If you even respond at all, rather than dodging this reasonable request, on the lame excuse that you don’t have to back up your claims because I’m just a “troll”, which for you clearly means “a person who says things I don’t like, but who debates politely, provides cites, and is just really frustrating”.
Well, there are plenty even among the “pedophile Muhammad”-Islamophobe type of internet pundits whose names and contact info are widely known.
And there are many less irrational critics of Islamist extremism who are also publicly identified. Such as Curtis Michael Brown, whose pro-Muhammad-cartoon article “Je suis Pamela” was published in Al-Jazeera America itself, and whose location and workplace are easily found on the internet. He seems to be chugging along okay.
Oh okay, that’s easily fixed:
I have no problem generally agreeing with statements like "“Muhammad’s legacy, peace be upon him, is seriously blighted by his participation in what we would now consider a coercive marriage with a girl whose extreme youth rendered her incapable of giving meaningful consent, although such marriages were legal and socially accepted in his time”.
As I already pointed out, though, it is equally valid to make statements like “The legacy of Jesus—or Moses—is seriously blighted by his condoning and normalization of chattel slavery, although that institution was legal and socially accepted in his time”.
What is not valid is to try to distort such reasonable modern critiques into hysterical attacks along the lines of “Jesus and Moses were pro-slavery monsters”, or “Muhammad was a pedophile”.
Personally, it doesn’t bother me at all. If Ramira or anybody else has any criticisms of my posting habits, they are welcome to state them. I’m not guaranteeing I’ll change my habits in response to such criticisms, but I certainly won’t get my feelings all hurt about them.
It’s not a question of hurt feelings, but of being irritated when someone says you are a sucker, a dupe; then says it again a few days later, then again, and again, and AGAIN. If that doesn’t irritate you at all, congratulations on your exceptional equanimity.
Eh, I don’t really have a problem recognizing that I am somewhat of a sucker for long-drawn-out exchanges with idiots and trolls. My rationalization is that the idiots and trolls are generally not the only ones reading the exchanges, and that if I think carefully about my arguments they may turn out to be helpful to other posters encountering similar idiotic/trollish remarks elsewhere.
So, just to clarify: are you calling me an idiot, a troll, or both? :dubious:
No.
“No” meaning “neither”? Or…?
Surely if you fuck a nine year old you’re a pedophile, no matter what age you lived in.
Hahahahaha good one, bruh! You’re smart and funny and make excellent points and your mom loves you!
You can set your personal definition of “pedophile” using whatever criteria you want. But the fact remains that for almost all of human history, adult men marrying (and fucking) girls shortly after they reached puberty—whether the girls were nine or ten, twelve or thirteen—was considered by most cultures, including most Christian cultures, to be entirely normal and non-abusive behavior.
We all (well, most) agree nowadays that a girl under 18 does not qualify as an adult just because she’s reached puberty. But most people in the medieval period would disagree.
So if you want to call Muhammad a “pedophile”, then you have to acknowledge that most other men of his era were just as “pedophilic” as he was, and that their “pedophilic” behavior was regarded as entirely normal in their societies. (In fact, due to his earlier marital situation Muhammad probably spent much less time in the course of his life fucking early-pubescent girls than many of his contemporaries did.)
Meaning I have no interest either in your intelligence level or your troll status (at least in the Pit, where trolling is not forbidden), so I don’t care whether you’re an idiot, a troll, both, or neither. What interests me is the debunkable wrongness of many of the things you say.
Are you sure? I bet he’d be happy to show you videos of pieces of paper with high test scores on them.
Even that alluring prospect is insufficient to awaken any interest on my part. Heck, I don’t even know or care what my own IQ test scores are.
Right? Ya think?
I think all of this would be very applicable if Aisha were, say, thirteen. That’s an age that people now (in the U.S. at least) would consider an appalling crime, if a 53 year old man had sex with a girl that young; yet all those arguments about traditional understanding of marriageable age could come into play. But nine?!? In what universe is that postpubescent, especially 1400 years ago when full maturation was later than it is now?
BTW, I don’t think it’s anywhere near universal even now to think 18 should be the hard cutoff. Age of consent laws have gone up since I was a teenager (and are IMO too high in most places), but plenty of states still have it set to 17 or 16.
Um, Thailand, for example? As I cited a mere dozen posts ago or so? Did you really forget all about it that quickly?
Archaeological studies don’t support the claim that onset of puberty occurs significantly earlier nowadays than in medieval times.
Believe me, I am not an advocate for modern child marriage, whether the children in question have hit puberty or not. But it’s ridiculous to suggest that it’s impossible for any girl of nine in medieval times (especially a well-cared-for girl from a wealthy family) to have reached puberty. Nine years is well within the realm of possibility on the early end of the puberty spectrum, both in medieval times and now. And, as should be very clear by now, puberty was the essential criterion of marriageability in girls in most medieval cultures.
So you simply do not have a leg to stand on when you try to argue for some kind of hard-and-fast dichotomy between “bride of 13 = just old-fashioned customs” and “bride of 9 = horrifying pedophilia”.
“Most places”? The most common age of consent in the US is 16, and you think that’s too high? While at the same time arguing that it’s an “appalling crime” to consider a girl of 13 capable of consenting to sex?
:dubious: Exactly where in the less-than-three-year interval between 13 (“appalling crime”) and 16 (“too high in most places”) do you think the correct cutoff for the age of consent should be located?
Kind of a whiplashy feeling, like I’m debating two different people at once here. “At least thirteen—how dare you!” “Younger than sixteen—how dare you!” :dubious:
It’s funny that you cited that deal about medieval England. I actually looked at that same cite before my previous post, which is why I used the phrasing “full maturation” rather than “onset of puberty” (although even defining it that way, you’ll notice, doesn’t get you down to nine). From that link:
Now for your other question, that as I say almost seems to come from the opposite side of the spectrum: When I was a teenager in Minnesota, the age of consent was 15. That seems about right to me. You’re guaranteed to be in high school by that age, unless you’ve been held back. And I don’t think having sex with a high school girl is pedophilia or statutory rape if she is into it. (That’s not to say I think it’s okay for a teacher to get involved with one of his/her students, even if they are 18 for that matter.)
If you don’t think there is a HUGE difference between 13 and 15, I wonder how many teenaged girls you know.