i swear muslims are so fking retarded

Frenulum

Frenulum

ㅤ
Joined
Mar 5, 2026
Posts
6,476
Reputation
15,522
Clix1



Prophet1



Clix2



Clix3



Clix4

muh "everyone did it and thats why i can fuck kids too because my prophet did it:feelsuhh:"
 
  • +1
  • JFL
  • Woah
Reactions: moggerofhumanity, Kara, CloudyCuck and 12 others
Frenulum said:
i said "its a pedo sect", he said "no its not, a few people dont represent a whole religion"
Click to expand...
I mean is that not true? An entire religion can't be held responsible for the misdeeds of a select few.
 
  • +1
  • Hmm...
Reactions: Kiril Velev, Jgns, AgentAngularity and 3 others
Frenulum said:
nice bait
Click to expand...
How is this bait? I'm asking you why you think what you think. You misinterpreted his point in this thread so I'm trying to understand your reasoning.
 
  • +1
  • JFL
Reactions: Kiril Velev, Jgns, prolarper and 3 others
This fucking nigger didn't even mention me in his thread I try my hardest go give great arguments , he goes ahead and makes a retarded thread without any counter arguments , just wrap it up
 
  • Ugh..
  • +1
Reactions: Kiril Velev and 81xa
Pelvix said:
This fucking nigger didn't even mention me in his thread I try my hardest go give great arguments , he goes ahead and makes a retarded thread without any counter arguments , just wrap it up
Click to expand...
lets put a pause to this shit and go destroy the freemasons and jews. the enemies of humanity
 
  • +1
  • JFL
Reactions: Kiril Velev, Jgns, 81xa and 1 other person
psychopathic said:
I mean is that not true? An entire religion can't be held responsible for the misdeeds of a select few.
Click to expand...
because in islam, muhammad is the prophet, he's meant to be the "perfect example" for muslims

doesnt matter if it was the norm back then, bottom line is that he is a perfect example for all muslims meaning that they permit child marriage, evident by the fact they do it very frequently today
 
  • +1
  • JFL
Reactions: Kara, Zygotic, Kiril Velev and 3 others
  • +1
  • JFL
Reactions: Kiril Velev, Frenulum and fynn
Epic's little org fucktoy talking
 
  • JFL
  • +1
Reactions: Kiril Velev, Jgns and Frenulum
81xa said:
because in islam, muhammad is the prophet, he's meant to be the "perfect example" for muslims

doesnt matter if it was the norm back then, bottom line is that he is a perfect example for all muslims meaning that they permit child marriage, evident by the fact they do it very frequently today
Click to expand...
Yeah but the only reason you view that as bad is because, presumably, you grew up in a western society where that was condemned and made illegal long ago. Suppose you grew up somewhere in which that was never looked down upon nor forbidden. It'd be of no significance to you. Morality is entirely subjective.
 
  • +1
  • Hmm...
Reactions: ICL, Kiril Velev and 81xa
psychopathic said:
Yeah but the only reason you view that as bad is because, presumably, you grew up in a western society where that was condemned and made illegal long ago. Suppose you grew up somewhere in which that was never looked down upon nor forbidden. It'd be of no significance to you. Morality is entirely subjective.
Click to expand...
The Western origin of the belief is irrelevant, young girls bodies aren't physically developed for sex, for example girls under 15 develop obstetric fistula at higher rates

If morality is entirely subjective and shaped by upbringing, then you also have no grounds to condemn something like colonialism, slavery, or anything else. Those were cultural norms too and the people doing them weren't raised to see them as wrong either

For example if we take torturing infants for entertainment, if you believe that's wrong everywhere and always, congratulations you're not a moral relativist and instead a larp

@ICL
 
  • +1
Reactions: Kara, Zygotic, cocaine? and 4 others
81xa said:
The Western origin of the belief is irrelevant, young girls bodies aren't physically developed for sex, for example girls under 15 develop obstetric fistula at higher rates

If morality is entirely subjective and shaped by upbringing, then you also have no grounds to condemn something like colonialism, slavery, or anything else. Those were cultural norms too and the people doing them weren't raised to see them as wrong either

For example if we take torturing infants for entertainment, if you believe that's wrong everywhere and always, congratulations you're not a moral relativist and instead a larp

@ICL
Click to expand...
To my understanding sex is not an aspect of Islamic marriage when it relates to a male marrying a prepubescent female. They typically raise them and then procreate with them once they turn 15 or have noticeable development. I certainly condone colonialism considering without it we wouldn't be here discussing these matters, don't care about slavery because I'm not a slave nor was I alive during that time, and sure, anything else is up for grabs. Torturing infants to gratify sadistic desires is genuinely not at all related to what's being discussed though. That evokes a distinct biological aversion in 99% of humans due to the fact that we are social creatures.
 
  • +1
  • JFL
  • Woah
Reactions: ICL, Kiril Velev, Jgns and 1 other person
psychopathic said:
To my understanding sex is not an aspect of Islamic marriage when it relates to a male marrying a prepubescent female. They typically raise them and then procreate with them once they turn 15 or have noticeable development. I certainly condone colonialism considering without it we wouldn't be here discussing these matters, don't care about slavery because I'm not a slave nor was I alive during that time, and sure, anything else is up for grabs. Torturing infants to gratify sadistic desires is genuinely not at all related to what's being discussed though. That evokes a distinct biological aversion in 99% of humans due to the fact that we are social creatures.
Click to expand...
Your infant torture point is weak you said it's wrong because it triggers a biological aversion in most humans which is grounding morality in something consistent across cultures, you dropped your original position

Protective instincts toward children from sexual access are also documented cross-culturally. If biological response is your standard then it goes both ways

The colonialism and slavery responses tell me that your belief is personal disengagement. "I don't care because it didn't affect me" isn't claim about the nature of morality. You started with "morality is entirely subjective" and ended with two different positions
 
  • +1
Reactions: Kiril Velev and Jgns
81xa said:
Your infant torture point is weak you said it's wrong because it triggers a biological aversion in most humans which is grounding morality in something consistent across cultures, you dropped your original position

Protective instincts toward children from sexual access are also documented cross-culturally. If biological response is your standard then it goes both ways

The colonialism and slavery responses tell me that your belief is personal disengagement. "I don't care because it didn't affect me" isn't claim about the nature of morality. You started with "morality is entirely subjective" and ended with two different positions
Click to expand...
Except I never said it was wrong. Reread what I said, and you'll realize I never condemned any points you made. Besides, even if I did believe it was wrong, that would be a subjective stance, as there are plenty of people out there who honestly do not see it as wrong. The argument started with Islamic marriages and what was stated in the Qur'an, you then began fixating on my point of moral subjectivity. You are actively splitting topics and telling me my positions are changing.
 
  • +1
Reactions: ICL, Kiril Velev and Jgns
why yall always fighting
 
  • +1
Reactions: Jgns
psychopathic said:
To my understanding sex is not an aspect of Islamic marriage when it relates to a male marrying a prepubescent female. They typically raise them and then procreate with them once they turn 15 or have noticeable development. I certainly condone colonialism considering without it we wouldn't be here discussing these matters, don't care about slavery because I'm not a slave nor was I alive during that time, and sure, anything else is up for grabs. Torturing infants to gratify sadistic desires is genuinely not at all related to what's being discussed though. That evokes a distinct biological aversion in 99% of humans due to the fact that we are social creatures.
Click to expand...
Icl the thought of raising someone with love then ‘breeding’ them is insanely disgusting
 
  • +1
Reactions: Frenulum, Zygotic and Kiril Velev
Jgns said:
Icl the thought of raising someone with love then ‘breeding’ them is insanely disgusting
Click to expand...
I guess. I don't think of it that way though.
 
  • +1
Reactions: ICL, Kiril Velev and Jgns
1781201769080

just two stacies arguing with each other normal day on this forum
 
  • JFL
Reactions: Frenulum, dhusc, ICL and 2 others
Jgns said:
Whats ur opinion on it
Click to expand...
If it's not consanguineous there'd be no room for birth defects or genetic diseases, so I don't see an issue. If you dislike the age gap, I understand that, but I don't relate. It's difficult to put into words why that is.
 
  • +1
Reactions: Jgns and ICL
psychopathic said:
Yeah but the only reason you view that as bad is because, presumably, you grew up in a western society where that was condemned and made illegal long ago. Suppose you grew up somewhere in which that was never looked down upon nor forbidden. It'd be of no significance to you. Morality is entirely subjective.
Click to expand...
Unfortunately, prophet muhammad tapped 9 year old aisha (water as we know) is an issue as she was pre-pubescent, which we can deduce as immoral due to biological factors.

Their book states that aisha played with dolls near the prophet, and he did not critique it.

Playing with dolls is prohibted in the religion, unless you are prepubescent

Hence, either the book is contradictory, or prophet muhammad statutorily raped a pre-pubescent child.

Many individuals argue that "but she's developed tho so the number doesn't matter"

However, she was developing, and she didn't even have developed features, so we can't deduce she's developed
 
Last edited:
  • +1
Reactions: Frenulum
ICL said:
Unfortunately, prophet muhammad tapped 9 year old aisha (water as we know) is an issue as she was pre-pubescent, which we can deduce as immoral due to biological factors.

Their book states that aisha played with dolls near the prophet, and he did not critique it.

Playing with dolls is prohibted in the religion, unless you are prepubescent

Hence, either the book is contradictory, or prophet muhammad statutorily raped a pre-pubescent child.

Many individuals argue that "but she's developed tho"

However, she was developing, and she didn't even have developed features, so we can't deduce she's developed
Click to expand...
The claim that Mohammed cracked Aisha when she was 9 comes from Hadith literature, not the actual Qur'an. There is additional speculation that she was much older due to reports of her sister Asma. I'm not religious by any stretch of the imagination, so don't confuse my points with the defense of Islam. At the end of the day, as we understand it, this took place at a time where humans were still an early species and the documentation of historical events was, at best, heavily inaccurate. We're essentially arguing over hearsay.
 
  • +1
Reactions: ICL and Jgns
psychopathic said:
Except I never said it was wrong. Reread what I said, and you'll realize I never condemned any points you made. Besides, even if I did believe it was wrong, that would be a subjective stance, as there are plenty of people out there who honestly do not see it as wrong. The argument started with Islamic marriages and what was stated in the Qur'an, you then began fixating on my point of moral subjectivity. You are actively splitting topics and telling me my positions are changing.
Click to expand...
im not splitting topics you introduced moral subjectivity as your primary argument to defend child marriage in your very first reply. Debunking the defense you provided is just how debate works

Your definition of subjectivity is poor since you're arguing that because some people out there do not see torture as wrong, morality must be subjective. Disagreement does not equal subjectivity. Some people believe the earth is flat but their existence does not make the shape of the planet a subjective stance does it? jfl

If you're retreating to the position that you never actually condemned infant torture, you're just larping moral nihilism, If your genuine stance is that literally nothing is objectively wrong, then you cannot defend child marriage either. Your entire argument is just "it is not wrong because nothing is wrong" you basically have no ethical framework at all

@ICL @Jgns @Kiril Velev @Frenulum
 
  • +1
Reactions: ICL and Jgns
psychopathic said:
The claim that Mohammed cracked Aisha when she was 9 comes from Hadith literature, not the actual Qur'an. There is additional speculation that she was much older due to reports of her sister Asma. I'm not religious by any stretch of the imagination, so don't confuse my points with the defense of Islam. At the end of the day, as we understand it, this took place at a time where humans were still an early species and the documentation of historical events was, at best, heavily inaccurate. We're essentially arguing over hearsay.
Click to expand...
It comes from Sahih Al Bukhari 5134, Sahih Al bukhari is one of the most reputable and strongest hadiths that serious muslim scholars use

@ICL
 
  • +1
Reactions: ICL and Jgns
psychopathic said:
The claim that Mohammed cracked Aisha when she was 9 comes from Hadith literature, not the actual Qur'an. There is additional speculation that she was much older due to reports of her sister Asma. I'm not religious by any stretch of the imagination, so don't confuse my points with the defense of Islam. At the end of the day, as we understand it, this took place at a time where humans were still an early species and the documentation of historical events was, at best, heavily inaccurate. We're essentially arguing over hearsay.
Click to expand...
Hadiths are reliable representations what the books say

It's simply the prophet quoted by another guy.

Regardless, what he did is still immoral. This spectrum is fairly nuanced, but the mudslimes are pretty stupid when it comes to protecting their religion. Pubescent children, whatever, that's another argument and frankly I can see when it's excusable with certain nuanced, though what prophet muhammad did is unexcusable and does not fall into those nuances

They also weren't "where humans were still an early species", it was less than a thousand years ago, humans have existed millions of years
 
81xa said:
im not splitting topics you introduced moral subjectivity as your primary argument to defend child marriage in your very first reply. Debunking the defense you provided is just how debate works

Your definition of subjectivity is poor since you're arguing that because some people out there do not see torture as wrong, morality must be subjective. Disagreement does not equal subjectivity. Some people believe the earth is flat but their existence does not make the shape of the planet a subjective stance does it? jfl

If you're retreating to the position that you never actually condemned infant torture, you're just larping moral nihilism, If your genuine stance is that literally nothing is objectively wrong, then you cannot defend child marriage either. Your entire argument is just "it is not wrong because nothing is wrong" you basically have no ethical framework at all

@ICL @Jgns @Kiril Velev @Frenulum
Click to expand...
Took you 32 minutes to drop this Grok rehearsed stink bomb and you still had to tag your minions. You're conflating moral subjectivism with moral nihilism and it's so goofy. Saying morality is subjective does not mean I approve of torture nor that nothing can be wrong according to a moral framework. Your flat earth analogy only works if my argument is "people disagree, therefore morality is subjective." Of course, if you were actually listening, you'd realize my point is that objective moral facts are not established in the same way empirical facts like the shape of the Earth are. Entirely different claims. You're becoming really tiresome really fast, so far, you've proven to be the only one who doesn't know what they believe. And I never condoned child marriage. In turn, I shall not cast my pearls amongst niggers.
 
  • +1
Reactions: asdvek
psychopathic said:
Took you 32 minutes to drop this Grok rehearsed stink bomb and you still had to tag your minions. You're conflating moral subjectivism with moral nihilism and it's so goofy. Saying morality is subjective does not mean I approve of torture nor that nothing can be wrong according to a moral framework. Your flat earth analogy only works if my argument is "people disagree, therefore morality is subjective." Of course, if you were actually listening, you'd realize my point is that objective moral facts are not established in the same way empirical facts like the shape of the Earth are. Entirely different claims. You're becoming really tiresome really fast, so far, you've proven to be the only one who doesn't know what they believe. And I never condoned child marriage. In turn, I shall not cast my pearls amongst niggers.
Click to expand...
your first message was running defense for child marriage by telling someone they only view it as bad because of "Western conditionin." You can backpedal now and say you never condoned it you can scroll up for 2 seconds and see

you can define morality as subjective but that means your framework has zero authority over anyone else, you cant logically tell someone they are wrong"for condemning child marriage, because condemning it is simply part of their framework you argued yourself to a point where your own opinions doesnt matter

flee nigger
 
Muslim tards be like a few evil people don’t represent us tho. Meanwhile the evil people are the nigga mohammed who they worship
 
  • +1
Reactions: Frenulum
WATERRRRRR
 
81xa said:
your first message was running defense for child marriage by telling someone they only view it as bad because of "Western conditionin." You can backpedal now and say you never condoned it you can scroll up for 2 seconds and see

you can define morality as subjective but that means your framework has zero authority over anyone else, you cant logically tell someone they are wrong"for condemning child marriage, because condemning it is simply part of their framework you argued yourself to a point where your own opinions doesnt matter

flee nigger
Click to expand...
Always get a good laugh out of people with meager intellect thinking they won an argument because of their fundamental misinterpretations of simple words.
 
psychopathic said:
Took you 32 minutes to drop this Grok rehearsed stink bomb and you still had to tag your minions. You're conflating moral subjectivism with moral nihilism and it's so goofy. Saying morality is subjective does not mean I approve of torture nor that nothing can be wrong according to a moral framework. Your flat earth analogy only works if my argument is "people disagree, therefore morality is subjective." Of course, if you were actually listening, you'd realize my point is that objective moral facts are not established in the same way empirical facts like the shape of the Earth are. Entirely different claims. You're becoming really tiresome really fast, so far, you've proven to be the only one who doesn't know what they believe. And I never condoned child marriage. In turn, I shall not cast my pearls amongst niggers.
Click to expand...
It's embarrassing seeing this complete random tag a bunch of other randoms to give him a pity rep and not even read a word from his garbage wall of text 😂

What a cringe circle jerk
 
  • +1
Reactions: psychopathic
psychopathic said:
Always get a good laugh out of people with meager intellect thinking they won an argument because of their fundamental misinterpretations of simple words.
Click to expand...
asdvek said:
It's embarrassing seeing this complete random tag a bunch of other randoms to give him a pity rep and not even read a word from his garbage wall of text 😂

What a cringe circle jerk
Click to expand...
Whatever protects your egos faggots
 
81xa said:
It comes from Sahih Al Bukhari 5134, Sahih Al bukhari is one of the most reputable and strongest hadiths that serious muslim scholars use

@ICL
Click to expand...
hadiths aren't infalliable and there are many claims of her being older

some being how age was recorded or her being in a conflict where no one under 14 could join etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

ForeignType
Normies are so retarded
Replies
5
Views
28
Ezzah
Ezzah
T
JFL Tiktokcels are so retarded
Replies
2
Views
28
naturelover
naturelover
yasuoh
admins are you retarded why did u sticky 10 fking threads
Replies
3
Views
42
Pony
Pony
5.5psl
Serious Why are british people so retarded
Replies
22
Views
151
dragomog
dragomog
dipenhydramine
self ban is so retarded tbh
Replies
3
Views
28
dipenhydramine
dipenhydramine

Users who are viewing this thread

  • Kiril Velev
  • Pelvix
  • Bruiser17
  • dhusc
  • 6”LTN
  • Pickletoil
  • CloudyCuck
  • Zenithian
  • Shrek2OnDvD
  • Mogger2000
  • ... and 10 more.
    • Total: 24 (Looksmaxers: 20, Bluepillers: 4)
    Back
    Top