Disturbed by Islamic debate

[Seadragon]

After reading Wizard's thread and the link provided by Keyplus, having come across this part of AB over the weekend, and after much thought - I must state my opinion, that I am appalled by KP's encouragement of Paedophilia (I quote his answer below). Furthermore I am disturbed by the Islamic doctrinisation clearly evident thru KP's posts.

I have long realised that any non-muslim cannot engage in a logical debate, regarding Islam, with a Muslim who adamantly argues and defends beliefs that are as other AB's said 'indefensible' and totally inexcusable. I suggest this is the reason why for centuries western thought and Islamic doctrinisation are incompatible and why, apart from this post, I don't engage in religious talk with muslims I work with, as I know how passionately and illogically they maintain their Islamic beliefs.

This doctrinisation is evident in KP's reply to Wizard's question - 'Would you object in todays world to someone having sex with a 9 year old?' - 27 Aug 09 at 22:34
KP - 'If that 9 year old has reached her puberty and mentally normal then I will have no objection if her parents marry her to anyone of their choice and with the consent of the girl'.

To analyse: 'reached her puberty' -- means her periods have started - variable in girls.
'mentally normal' - a large proportion of the population are born mentally normal unless
diagnosed otherwise, therefore this implies - FROM BIRTH.
'no objection if her parents marry her' - 2 implications present - Firstly, control that parents
have over children thru Islamic doctrinisation beginning at early age (Also evident thru
many of KP's posts about parents 'being involved' and they 'make these decisions.'
Secondly - encouragment of Paedophilia as 'no objection' to act.
'with consent of girl' - The word 'consent' to consensual sexual relations recognised in
the UK is 16 years old. Islamic doctrin

[Seadragon]

To continue - (I just realised ) The word 'consent' to consensual sexual relations recognised in the Uk is 16 years old. Islamic doctrine is that the girl has consented by virtue of nature which then implies that age can be lower than 9 years old. One can also argue consent has in the answer 'Yes' of a 'mentally normal' child - the age can be reduced to anywhere near 2 years old.

Bear with me - I am finishing opinion on the next answer post below.

[MrsT]

standard practice under islam, the example being set by the prophet himself! Do not be surprised at what these brainwashed terorsists believe. Get them to tell you how they feel about gays, that's another eye openner!

[Seadragon]

I have referred to KP's question - 'What criteria do you use to establish that a certain person is not child anymore?

- In the UK it is 16 years old
- In Spain, has alluded to in posts, I understand it is 13 years
- In Islamic countries it seems to be anywhere from 2 years plus depending on your view (Also ref to Khomenii)

I appreciate that KP has allowed for parental discretion, when he asks, 'How many muslims in the 20th Century marry 9 year old girls?' He talks of his own daughter's marriage and his role as a father.

However, his encouragement and 'no objection' defence to Paedophilia within the Islamic Community disturbs me as much as the Islamic doctrinisation of the overwhelming number of children who attend Muslim schools and Mosques in which centuries old beliefs are still being perpetuated and accepted in today's western society.

I just wanted to state my opinion.

[jno]

I don't know why you expect 'logic' in a debate about religion; religion is about something other than logic. Indoctrination is not restricted to Islam. And you have no particular right to demand that everyone agrees with your views on pedophilia or any other subject. Keyplus is of course limited by the law of the land like anyone else. (Though I wouldn't bet that British girls under 16 feel much bothered by the law, any more than people who think speed limits don't apply to them, or drug legislation etc).

If you have evidence of nine-year-olds being raped, tell the police. If not then you are working yourself up into a rage about a hypothetical question.

[tamborine]

Being convent educated & now having a bus-pass I can vouch that R.catholics were as vehement regarding their faith. Blind belief was demanded of me and encouragement to offer my life to the church for the welfare of mankind. However, being a rebellious nomad thwarted my parents desires for me.

Modern, educated muslim asians will hopefully, defy their parents and think independantly likewise. They have that chance in UK!

[beso]

tamborinen is correct in pointing out that the Christian churches have been just as brutal and dictatorial throughout history. It is the nature of all the Abrahamic faiths who basic concepts are:

1. There is only one way and one truth.
2. We are the special people in the eyes of God.
3. We are the keepers and defenders of the faith.
4. We directly communicate with God who tells us the absolute truth.
5. This truth must be followed without exception by everyone or they are not worthy of life.
6. This truth cannot be questioned or analysed in any way.
7. All apparent contradictions are merely the result of the reader not understanding God's will.
8. We must not trust those who question the truth or deny God.
9. We do not need to analyse our thoughts and actions as they are guided by God.
10. In his name we shall prevail and the world will be cleansed.

Unless we can move on from this primitive philosophy the planet is doomed.

[Seadragon]

Logic defined, is the process of reasoning. One would expect that in any debate. Jno, you don't seem to understand what I am saying. And you are undermining the gravity of what KP has said, he does not in the slightest apologise or withdraw his answer in which he clearly admitted to encouraging Paedophilia. Whether you say that is in a hypothetical context or not, I disagree with you and you need to read all the posts relating to the issue.

However, for arguments sake, if I were asked Wizard's question with the added context that the situation is 'hypothetical', I would say emphatically No - No to encouraging, aiding, abetting or assisting Paedophilia. From your response Jno, in suggesting that Wizard's question is in an 'hypothetical' context allows for the possibly of a 'Yes' answer. So I am interested Jno in knowing what your answer is to Wizard's question put in a 'hypothetical' context?

And if I was aware of any illegal act perpetrated against a child under 16, I would not hesitate in informing the Police. That cannot be said for KP however, as he admits in his own words that he has 'no objection.'

[Ankou]

keyplus was quite careful in his response.

he was advocating the 'promise' of marriage, not the outright permission/condonation of marriage + sex (paedophilia), please read the history of that thread and previous threads to really understand his concept - unless i am wrong, kp could put me right here......

such questions as you have posed are really lackadaisical if you are only seeing the 'paedophilia' bandwagon.

[Seadragon]

Ankou - I'm repeating myself now, but for your clarification, the question exactly quoted from Wizard's post at 21:34 - 27 Aug 09 is 'Would you object in today's world to someone having sex with a 9 year old girl? Yes or no?'

The word 'sex' clearly implies sexual relations, whether the girl is married or not is no justification. The question is boldly and clearly stated. In fact as you say, if KP was careful in his response, I suggest that we should be more concerned. Also, the whole thread over 2-3 days plus related to the Islamic view of Paedophilia. If you like, Ankou, you could raise another issue such as homosexuality as suggested by Mrs T and we can pick up on that 'bandwagon?'

[naomi24]

On the other thread, Wizard asked:

Would you object in today's world to someone having sex with a 9 year old girl? Yes or no?

And Keyplus replied:

If that 9 years old has reached to her puberty and mentally normal then I will have no objection if her parents marry her to anyone of their choice and with the consent of the girl.

Wiz is talking about paedophilia, but I think what we have to take into account here is the culture that Keyplus has been brought up with. As abhorrent as it is, and as wrong as it is, in his culture a post-pubescent 9 year old is considered to be a mature woman - and he has defended that by saying that his criteria for determining the age of consent is the onset of puberty. Therefore, in Keyplus's mind, a grown man marrying and having sex with his 9 year old 'wife' is not a paedophile.

Keyplus has been indoctrinated into a culture that sees this as perfectly acceptable, and hence he firmly believes he is justified in holding the opinions he does. However, he is, most of the time, careful in his responses because he is well aware that his values are utterly unacceptable to a civilised society or to the modern world.

[Seadragon]

I totally agree with you Naomi.

End of subject for me. I've known muslims all my life, from school, uni, neighbours, work etc and any discussion on a religious aspect of Islam is unreasonably, unjustificably and illogically defended. Have to go now, thanks to all contributors on this thread.

[Seadragon]

It is increasingly late now but I really have to make this post as its been on my mind. Ankou, I hope you are still around? I wanted to say that I have been thinking and spruing around (don't know what that means and if the word exists) but what you were saying about logic and religion. I take on board your point. I interpret logic in religion as a process of reasoning whatever the outcome, that is irrelevant. I placed the discussion of 'Paedo..' in a real setting. But then I thought and thought about what you said and I figured that you would be right as the more abstract the notion, the less logic there would be. Instead there would be intuition? So I'm now thinking that you make a good and valid point about logic and religion and I will still continue to think about it. But I withdraw the word 'logic' from what I said. Thanks for the discussion.

[Ankou]

just for the purposes of administration, it was jno not me. although i wish i could have had jno's eloquence of response.

credit where credit is due.

[keyplus90]

fender62 (17:03 11-Sep-2009)
Report This

, …………………because the koran sanctions it ie marriage to little girls. sad......

Really? ………..Where?

[naomi24]

JNO, you said 'Keyplus is of course limited by the law of the land like anyone else.'

That is true, but Seadragon isn't working himself/herself up into a rage about a hypothetical queston because the law of our land cannot prevent parents here from sending their daughters into arranged marriages abroad.

[naomi24]

The Koran doesn't mention the age at which girls can be married, but it doesn't need to because it certainly mentions the rules for divorcing pre-pubescent girls, and therefore clearly condones marriage - and sex - with them. (It recommends a three month waiting period to ensure the wife isn't pregnant).

Koran, 65:4
If you are in doubt concerning those of your wives who have ceased menstruating, know that their waiting period shall be three months. THE SAME SHALL APPLY TO THOSE WHO HAVE NOT YET MENSTRUATED.

[keyplus90]

naomi24 (23:32 28-Aug-2009)
Report This
Keyplus, your question didn't mention marriage. It asked if it was ok to have sex with someone who is physically 18 but mentally only 8, and in my opinion it is not. You didn't however, tell me what you think, so what do you think?

Now you ask 'would it be ok to have sex with someone who is 18 but not yet reached puberty?' I assume by that you mean someone who doesn't have a serious medical condition, but simply doesn't yet have periods (as sometimes happens) - and in that case, I would say yes.

In this post of your’s on another thread, you have given answer to your own question what you mentioned in that ^^^^^ verse of Quran. However if you have difficulties in finding that in your own post then let me know and I will help you see it properly.