Thread: koran, allah, and all things islam

We see often, instances of strange behaviour coming from the clerics and judges within the islamic faith concerning sexual attitudes with children. We have a thread on this very subject under discussion as we write.

Has this any place in the modern world ?, let alone when the 'prophet' was the great leader and inspiration behind islamic beliefs.

A yes or no would sufice.

Originally Posted by AntRobertson

keda once told me that he was a writer of some sort.

Fiction presumably..

^Children's books.

Originally Posted by DrB0b

Originally Posted by meepho

We see often, instances of strange behaviour coming from the clerics and judges within the islamic faith concerning sexual attitudes with children. We have a thread on this very subject under discussion as we write.

Has this any place in the modern world ?, let alone when the 'prophet' was the great leader and inspiration behind islamic beliefs.

A yes or no would sufice.

And you're not going to get a yes or no, why should you? You've put that at the end of a couple of posts, bloody stupid thing to stipulate. Do you seriously believe that everything has a yes or no answer?


Abuse takes place anywhere people have power over vulnerable people. It seems to be particularly prevalent in religious circles, all of them. You may have noticed some references to it in the Catholic church over the last 20 years or so, or you may have been on another planet.

Abuse of power is part and parcel of almost all religions, maybe all. Sexual abuse has no place anywhere.

Interestingly, what we actually see often are strange (to us) attitudes of Islamic judges regarding marriage with children, it's not often we see much about their sexual attitudes towards children (though I don't doubt they're any less depraved than any other religious groups we don't often see this, probably because they have a cultire of denial and impunity as strong as the Catholic churches up to a few years ago).

Marriage and sex are not the same thing in much of the world, a marriage is often a political contract (as in Mohammed and Aisha, a marriage which united two tribes) or a property contract. Many Westerners often seem to get the two confused, I sometimes wonder if it's because they're fundamentally dirty-minded or if they're genuinely incapable of seeing that sometimes things are done differently elsewhere.

We are discussing, islam, so why try to bring in other faiths and religions, we can debate them seperately.

You tend to really want to understand why these people, do strange things with children.
Me, i do not really want to understand, i would like it stopped, simple really.

And you are correct i would never actually expect a simple yes or no from yourself bob.

Originally Posted by DrB0b

If you want to make an argument that Mohammed was not really a very pleasant person, (he wasn't a very pleasant person and nobody has denied that anyway) why don't you do that without resorting to lies and fakes - it's not difficult. It's actually very easy to show the evils of religion and religious people, that can be done with any religion and without resorting to lies but in your desire to show Islam as the most evil of all you're actually destroying any credibilty your anti-Islamic stance might have.

I think this ^ summs it up very good !


But I have to add my two bits to this thread.
What make the Koran so dangerous is the claim that it is the "direct" word from God. Its like a freebee. Other religions are a bit more subtle.

Originally Posted by Keda
the multitude of passages in the Islamic holy texts that have to do with his sexual preferences and vulgar practices

Vulgar practices !
Keda is right. Kill or killing, slaves, beating, denouncing people or religion, exploiting, hating or wanting to destroy a race/religion (jews), etc. etc.etc.
Is submission and obedience not vulgar ???????? Is this not what islam is about ?

"to show the evils of any religion" is easy. True
But Islam (my opinion) takes the cake.

A bit of Love & Forgiveness would have helped Aisha and the Koran, and the rest of the world to understand it better.

Originally Posted by meepho

We see often, instances of strange behaviour coming from the clerics and judges within the islamic faith concerning sexual attitudes with children. We have a thread on this very subject under discussion as we write.

Has this any place in the modern world ?, let alone when the 'prophet' was the great leader and inspiration behind islamic beliefs.

A yes or no would sufice.

You fail in expecting a straight answer.

Originally Posted by keda

Originally Posted by meepho

We see often, instances of strange behaviour coming from the clerics and judges within the islamic faith concerning sexual attitudes with children. We have a thread on this very subject under discussion as we write.

Has this any place in the modern world ?, let alone when the 'prophet' was the great leader and inspiration behind islamic beliefs.

A yes or no would sufice.

You fail in expecting a straight answer.

Originally Posted by AntRobertson

^Children's books.

I made enough from my series of books to comfortably retire. So sorry if that upsets you, but not everyone can be a 3rd World bigshot as compo for failing back home.

Drop the envy.

Originally Posted by meepho

Originally Posted by DrB0b

Originally Posted by meepho

We see often, instances of strange behaviour coming from the clerics and judges within the islamic faith concerning sexual attitudes with children. We have a thread on this very subject under discussion as we write.

Has this any place in the modern world ?, let alone when the 'prophet' was the great leader and inspiration behind islamic beliefs.

A yes or no would sufice.

And you're not going to get a yes or no, why should you? You've put that at the end of a couple of posts, bloody stupid thing to stipulate. Do you seriously believe that everything has a yes or no answer?


Abuse takes place anywhere people have power over vulnerable people. It seems to be particularly prevalent in religious circles, all of them. You may have noticed some references to it in the Catholic church over the last 20 years or so, or you may have been on another planet.

Abuse of power is part and parcel of almost all religions, maybe all. Sexual abuse has no place anywhere.

Interestingly, what we actually see often are strange (to us) attitudes of Islamic judges regarding marriage with children, it's not often we see much about their sexual attitudes towards children (though I don't doubt they're any less depraved than any other religious groups we don't often see this, probably because they have a cultire of denial and impunity as strong as the Catholic churches up to a few years ago).

Marriage and sex are not the same thing in much of the world, a marriage is often a political contract (as in Mohammed and Aisha, a marriage which united two tribes) or a property contract. Many Westerners often seem to get the two confused, I sometimes wonder if it's because they're fundamentally dirty-minded or if they're genuinely incapable of seeing that sometimes things are done differently elsewhere.

We are discussing, islam, so why try to bring in other faiths and religions, we can debate them seperately.

You tend to really want to understand why these people, do strange things with children.
Me, i do not really want to understand, i would like it stopped, simple really.

And you are correct i would never actually expect a simple yes or no from yourself bob.

Understanding something is the key to defeating it, unless you're one of those hippies who believes that understanding means sympathising with. Surely you've heard the phrase "know your enemy".

I bring in other faiths and religions to point out that the problem is not with Islam itself, the problem is with religion, power, economics, and society. Unlike you I don't believe that things happen in isolation nor do I believe that ignorance of evil is a good way to fight evil. I despise the evil done in the name of religion, particularly in the name of Islam at the moment, as much as anybody but I don't believe that it can be defeated by ignorance and bigotry. I believe that the ignorance and bigotry displayed by so many is actually helpful to the evil-doers. In that sense I believe the bigots are unwitting collaborators with the terrorists and the other scumbags and that's why I despise them so much.

Originally Posted by DrB0b

If you want to make an argument that Mohammed was not really a very pleasant person, (he wasn't a very pleasant person and nobody has denied that anyway) why don't you do that without resorting to lies and fakes - it's not difficult. It's actually very easy to show the evils of religion and religious people, that can be done with any religion and without resorting to lies but in your desire to show Islam as the most evil of all you're actually destroying any credibilty your anti-Islamic stance might have.

Um, I believe one-fourth of the world's population (plus apologists, lefties etc) would strongly disagree with your outrageous notion that Mohamed was less than perfect. In many parts of the world you could lose your head just by voicing that thought.

Still, I guess your comments are as fair and accurate as your ludicrous claim that the primary target of the fundamentalists is Muslims, and that the fundamentalists are not fighting a war against the West.


Which in turn is just as odd as (*203):

Originally Posted by drbob

The word is ذمي. It means a non-muslim to whom the state has an obligation of protection. That is, it extends to non-Muslims exactly the same rights as Muslims, in other words equal rights. What, exactly, is wrong with that?

...which demonstrates either that as an academic you are not interested in dhimmitude beyond it's etymology, or that you sincerely believe the rubbish you posted about equality between Muslims and non-Muslims under Muslim rule. Not that I expect a straight answer, but which is it?


Meanwhile, *232

Originally Posted by drbob

Judaism predates Akhenaten? That's news. You have some evidence of that? BTW biblical evidence is not evidence.

Would a live video clip suffice? Is conflicting and inconclusive archaeological evidence, better or worse than 'biblical' evidence?

If it is proven to your satisfaction as a reasonable person, without any evidence whatever beyond your own common sense, that Mohamed did not cause by command the moon to separate in two halves, one half to come down to earth and enter the sleeve of his cloak, then leave by the other sleeve to rejoin its partner in the night sky, would you be prepared to claim that whether this tale is a lie or an exaggeration, it demonstrates clearly and conclusively that the Koran is flawed, and therefore not perfect?

Originally Posted by AntRobertson

Originally Posted by keda

Originally Posted by AntRobertson

^Children's books.

I made enough from my series of books to comfortably retire. So sorry if that upsets you, but not everyone can be a 3rd World bigshot as compo for failing back home.

Drop the envy.

So they were children's books then? Well done. And don't worry I'm not upset nor envious in the slightest. In fact I don't actually care. Like I've already said, I've no idea why you felt compelled to tell me that in the first place. Trying to be a 3rd World bigshot maybe?

But there is just one thing though: you did write them correct? I mean, you didn't, ahem, 'borrow' from other people?

All nine-and-a-half, which still leaves an envious insect pretending to be a 3rd World bigshot as compo for being a home failure.

Originally Posted by keda

You fail in expecting a straight answer.

Originally Posted by keda

Not that I expect a straight answer, but which is it?

Speaking of which...

Are you at any time even going to consider actually aaddressing any of the direct questions that have been posted to you in this thread?

Or have we skipped past that step to now pretending that they weren't asked.

Originally Posted by keda

All nine-and-a-half, which still leaves an envious insect pretending to be a 3rd World bigshot as compo for being a home failure.

Well what can I say keda - if it makes you feel better to imagine me as being envious of you based on something that I never actually enquired about in the first place, that you instead rather oddly volunteered -- and, given your track record, may well be, ahem, exaggerated in any event -- then more power to you. Fill yer boots. Ditto referring to someone you know nothing about as a 'home failure'.

My bet is that it doesn't actually work though. Not really, eh keda.

Islam and Sex (part 2)

Was Mohamed a pedophile?

Some people claim that Mohamed was a pedophile, while others shy at the thought. Some define pedophilia one way, while others prefer something else. He was certainly a sexual predator and stretched the bounds of decency even for his time and place, but without a common definition it’s arguable either way.

One could fairly argue that as Western societies today cannot agree on a common age of consent for girls, we should not impose higher standards for isolated barbarians 1400 years ago.

Otoh, while our enlightened societies protect women and especially children, Islam offers no protection for women, or young girls, from sexual gratification by Muslim males. As already pointed out earlier in this thread, and which Muslims and their apologists tend to duck as one, women in Islam attract little to zero respect and rights, and their consent is not required for sexual purposes. They exist as little more than walking vaginas to be used by males for sexual gratification and procreation, and may be beaten to ensure compliance. ALL on the basis of deeply flawed holy texts and a backward desert culture that has sadly survived to afflict the modern age.

Now, Mohamed collaborated with Allah to reduce the sexual age to 9. Does this make him a pedophile, and does this make him a pedophile by the standards of his time, or only by our standards?

Fact is, he had a sexual relationship with a 9-year-old whom he had ‘fondled’ and “enjoyed” since she was 6 and still playing with dolls. If anyone doubts what he was up to during her 3 pre-pubescent years, there’s a persuasive clue in the male-dominated ideology of Islam that condones non-vaginal sex with wives under the age of 9.

In his favour, at least according to the scriptures, is that he waited until she was nine to consummate the marriage. There’s no mention why, so it’s only guesswork that he waited for her to menstruate, though I can’t see many pedophiles being overly concerned about this detail. If he wished to have vaginal sex with her before she reached the age 9, as the perfect man he enjoyed Allah's rent’a’revelation, and could have simply conjured up another divine command to sanction it.

It should also be noted that Abu Bakr and Omar, who later became the first and second Caliphs, raised concerns at Mohamed’s proclivity for young girls. They were both younger than Mohamed, which dilutes the age discrepancy and makes it all the more pertinent to any discourse on Mohamed’s sexuality.

In the context of pedophilia, Mohamed’s conduct with young girls, with more to come, is not consistent with the sexual discipline a reasonable person should expect from a "prophet of god”. It is even less consistent with visions of the “perfect” and "most moral" man, which Islam holds him up to be.

Mohamed's sexual antics and approval of sex with young girls, has become part of immutable Islamic tradition. Aside from his own sexual caricature, his claimed “revelations” from Allah condone sleeping with underage girls, and even by his own repulsive standards this is not compatible with Western civilisation.

It is no secret that the Ayatollah Khomeini married a 12-year-old girl, and that he also sanctioned using younger girls and even infants for sexual pleasure, with a caution that full penetration should not be achieved until the baby is a bit older. The message here should be clear to all, including Muslims and apologists, who tend to remain silent as I expect they will now.

So, was Mohamed a pedophile? Even allowing tolerance for his time and age and mentality, is he at least guilty of founding a stagnating ideology which has clearly not advanced with human progress?

Originally Posted by AntRobertson

Originally Posted by keda

All nine-and-a-half, which still leaves an envious insect pretending to be a 3rd World bigshot as compo for being a home failure.

Well what can I say keda - if it makes you feel better to imagine me as being envious of you based on something that I never actually enquired about in the first place, that you instead rather oddly volunteered -- and, given your track record, may well be, ahem, exaggerated in any event -- then more power to you. Fill yer boots. Ditto referring to someone you know nothing about as a 'home failure'.

My bet is that it doesn't actually work though. Not really, eh keda.

Not envious...it doesn't niggle you...then why bring it up in the first place...?

Originally Posted by AntRobertson

keda once told me that he was a writer of some sort.

Eat your heart out.

Hover, moth, hover...or log off sometime and get yourself a life.

Originally Posted by keda

Not envious...it doesn't niggle you...then why bring it up in the first place...?

Err I didn't, you did. That's the point. I only mentioned it because the issue of you cut 'n pasting unattributed content was raised. Sheesh, I hope you were a better writer than you are at reading!

It niggles at me no more than any claim made by an anonymous stranger on an internet forum would. Frankly to me it's in the same class as Smeg and his girlfriends, BMW, trust fund and yacht. You both having a shared and common history of, and noted propensity for, a strained relationship with the truth and/or objective reality.

Originally Posted by keda

Hover, moth, hover...or log off sometime and get yourself a life.

Are you at any time even going to consider actually aaddressing any of the direct questions that have been posted to you in this thread?

Or have we skipped past that step to now pretending that they weren't asked.

So that would be the latter option then.

Well I for one am not completely and utterly surprised in the slightest.

Originally Posted by DrB0b

Originally Posted by meepho

Originally Posted by DrB0b

Originally Posted by meepho

We see often, instances of strange behaviour coming from the clerics and judges within the islamic faith concerning sexual attitudes with children. We have a thread on this very subject under discussion as we write.

Has this any place in the modern world ?, let alone when the 'prophet' was the great leader and inspiration behind islamic beliefs.

A yes or no would sufice.

And you're not going to get a yes or no, why should you? You've put that at the end of a couple of posts, bloody stupid thing to stipulate. Do you seriously believe that everything has a yes or no answer?


Abuse takes place anywhere people have power over vulnerable people. It seems to be particularly prevalent in religious circles, all of them. You may have noticed some references to it in the Catholic church over the last 20 years or so, or you may have been on another planet.

Abuse of power is part and parcel of almost all religions, maybe all. Sexual abuse has no place anywhere.

Interestingly, what we actually see often are strange (to us) attitudes of Islamic judges regarding marriage with children, it's not often we see much about their sexual attitudes towards children (though I don't doubt they're any less depraved than any other religious groups we don't often see this, probably because they have a cultire of denial and impunity as strong as the Catholic churches up to a few years ago).

Marriage and sex are not the same thing in much of the world, a marriage is often a political contract (as in Mohammed and Aisha, a marriage which united two tribes) or a property contract. Many Westerners often seem to get the two confused, I sometimes wonder if it's because they're fundamentally dirty-minded or if they're genuinely incapable of seeing that sometimes things are done differently elsewhere.

We are discussing, islam, so why try to bring in other faiths and religions, we can debate them seperately.

You tend to really want to understand why these people, do strange things with children.
Me, i do not really want to understand, i would like it stopped, simple really.

And you are correct i would never actually expect a simple yes or no from yourself bob.

Understanding something is the key to defeating it, unless you're one of those hippies who believes that understanding means sympathising with. Surely you've heard the phrase "know your enemy".

I bring in other faiths and religions to point out that the problem is not with Islam itself, the problem is with religion, power, economics, and society. Unlike you I don't believe that things happen in isolation nor do I believe that ignorance of evil is a good way to fight evil. I despise the evil done in the name of religion, particularly in the name of Islam at the moment, as much as anybody but I don't believe that it can be defeated by ignorance and bigotry. I believe that the ignorance and bigotry displayed by so many is actually helpful to the evil-doers. In that sense I believe the bigots are unwitting collaborators with the terrorists and the other scumbags and that's why I despise them so much.

I liked your post, up to the last sentence.
Who would you consider a bigot and whom would be ignorant.

A lot of people get labled a bigot or racist simply for holding a particular view point.

These days in a lot of countries, especially europe we are seeing a rise in the right wing element, this imo is not due to bigotry, it can in most cases be born from frustration at the present governments lack of direction and actions.
So people vote right to make a point, and it is working, the main leaders in europe are taking note.

I firmly believe in cohesion, but the islamic belief does not really interact with the western culture, if any faith, creed or religion comes to the UK then they must at least try to respect our way of life, god knows we make it easy enough.

If choudry marches through wotten basset, for a publicity stunt, then i shall make a point of going thier to drown him out, would that make me a bigot for standing up for what i believe in, i hope not.

Originally Posted by keda

Still, I guess your comments are as fair and accurate as your ludicrous claim that the primary target of the fundamentalists is Muslims, and that the fundamentalists are not fighting a war against the West.

Hmm, ludicrous, eh? Let's see what the statistics are.








All from http://ctc.usma.edu/Deadly%20Vanguards_Complete_L.pdf

At least 88% of Al Qaeda victims are Muslims. So yes, my claim is accurate, as are my comments.

BTW, the quoted text comes from the Combating Terrorism Center at West Point, a liitle more credible than the Internet Warrior at religionofpeace.com, don't you think?

You might also like to check out the rest of Combating Terrorism Center: Reports

Originally Posted by meepho

Originally Posted by DrB0b

Originally Posted by meepho

Originally Posted by DrB0b

Originally Posted by meepho

We see often, instances of strange behaviour coming from the clerics and judges within the islamic faith concerning sexual attitudes with children. We have a thread on this very subject under discussion as we write.

Has this any place in the modern world ?, let alone when the 'prophet' was the great leader and inspiration behind islamic beliefs.

A yes or no would sufice.

And you're not going to get a yes or no, why should you? You've put that at the end of a couple of posts, bloody stupid thing to stipulate. Do you seriously believe that everything has a yes or no answer?


Abuse takes place anywhere people have power over vulnerable people. It seems to be particularly prevalent in religious circles, all of them. You may have noticed some references to it in the Catholic church over the last 20 years or so, or you may have been on another planet.

Abuse of power is part and parcel of almost all religions, maybe all. Sexual abuse has no place anywhere.

Interestingly, what we actually see often are strange (to us) attitudes of Islamic judges regarding marriage with children, it's not often we see much about their sexual attitudes towards children (though I don't doubt they're any less depraved than any other religious groups we don't often see this, probably because they have a cultire of denial and impunity as strong as the Catholic churches up to a few years ago).

Marriage and sex are not the same thing in much of the world, a marriage is often a political contract (as in Mohammed and Aisha, a marriage which united two tribes) or a property contract. Many Westerners often seem to get the two confused, I sometimes wonder if it's because they're fundamentally dirty-minded or if they're genuinely incapable of seeing that sometimes things are done differently elsewhere.

We are discussing, islam, so why try to bring in other faiths and religions, we can debate them seperately.

You tend to really want to understand why these people, do strange things with children.
Me, i do not really want to understand, i would like it stopped, simple really.

And you are correct i would never actually expect a simple yes or no from yourself bob.

Understanding something is the key to defeating it, unless you're one of those hippies who believes that understanding means sympathising with. Surely you've heard the phrase "know your enemy".

I bring in other faiths and religions to point out that the problem is not with Islam itself, the problem is with religion, power, economics, and society. Unlike you I don't believe that things happen in isolation nor do I believe that ignorance of evil is a good way to fight evil. I despise the evil done in the name of religion, particularly in the name of Islam at the moment, as much as anybody but I don't believe that it can be defeated by ignorance and bigotry. I believe that the ignorance and bigotry displayed by so many is actually helpful to the evil-doers. In that sense I believe the bigots are unwitting collaborators with the terrorists and the other scumbags and that's why I despise them so much.

I liked your post, up to the last sentence.
Who would you consider a bigot and whom would be ignorant.

A lot of people get labled a bigot or racist simply for holding a particular view point.

These days in a lot of countries, especially europe we are seeing a rise in the right wing element, this imo is not due to bigotry, it can in most cases be born from frustration at the present governments lack of direction and actions.
So people vote right to make a point, and it is working, the main leaders in europe are taking note.

I firmly believe in cohesion, but the islamic belief does not really interact with the western culture, if any faith, creed or religion comes to the UK then they must at least try to respect our way of life, god knows we make it easy enough.

If choudry marches through wotten basset, for a publicity stunt, then i shall make a point of going thier to drown him out, would that make me a bigot for standing up for what i believe in, i hope not.

A bigot is somebody whose opinions are based on ignorance rather than knowledge. Kneejerk reactionaries, if you like. Bigots are people who will believe any lie as long as it bolsters their opinions. This thread shows some good examples of Bigotry. Kedia believes Islam is fundamentally evil. He doesn't have any knowledge to back that stance up. He cuts and pastes essays from one particular website to back them up . The author of that website is notorious for manufacturing his quotes and his analytical abilities are infantile. Nevertheless Keda, ignorant of whether or not what the religionofpeace website is true, posts those essays without any fact-checking purely because they back up what he already believed. A sort of opposite to the normal learning process.

I agree that the word bigot is overused, it shouldn't just be used as an insult for people you disagree with and I try not to use it in that sense. There are a number of people on this site with a very strong dislike of Islam but I don't think they're bigots, that's because they're able to present a rational basis for their beliefs and it's obvious from their posts that they've put some effort into learning about Islam and Islamists. They can present intelligent arguments and they also respond to queries about their stance. Keda is not one of them, he just hates muzzies and will stoop to any depth to justify his hatred,cannot present a rational argument based on fact and cannot and will not answer questions (his response to a question is almost always an insult or another question).

If I was still in the UK and that march was still going ahead I would have gone to Wooton Basset to protest against those lunatics too, though I would probably have been embarassed by some of the company I would have to keep there.

Standing up for what you believe in doesn't make you a bigot. Believing that an entire group of people are evil because of the actions of a few does.

Originally Posted by DrB0b

... There are a number of people on this site with a very strong dislike of Islam but I don't think they're bigots because they're able to present a rational basis for their beliefs and it's obvious from their posts that they've put some effort into learning about Islam and Islamists...

... Standing up for what you believe in doesn't make you a bigot. Believing that an entire group of people are evil because of the actions of a few does.

Well put. To me it's more about recourse to objective fact and logic to support an opinion as opposed to being 'right' or 'wrong'. There are some posters on here that, whilst I often disagree with their conclusions, I can't fault the process at which they used to arrive at them. Then there are others that think that repeating something often enough somehow makes it true.

I agree that the word bigot is overused, it shouldn't just be used as an insult for people you disagree with

The converse of that is also true, the banding about of "Mussie lover" and the like.