islam is against pedophilia,bible promotes it

Christians and jews don't really have a leg to stand on when they keep mentioning Aisha's age. So many christian kings married 3 year olds and 5 year olds.
 
  • +1
  • Woah
Reactions: KD6Imp33, foid_slayr and MLP
Moooodslimesssssss are NIGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGERRRRRRRRRRSSSSSSSSSS


 
  • JFL
  • Ugh..
  • +1
Reactions: Bryce, Peubert and rares54
>The article argues that the Biblical standard for marriage age aligns with the onset of puberty, historically around age 12.
where's the pedophilia exactly?
 
  • +1
Reactions: MLP
IAMNOTANINCEL said:
>The article argues that the Biblical standard for marriage age aligns with the onset of puberty, historically around age 12.
where's the pedophilia exactly?
Click to expand...
12 is considered pedophilia in modern society
 
  • +1
Reactions: Draak77
vortex878 said:
how old is aishah buddy
Click to expand...
Nevertheless, it should be noted that just because a person is pubescent does not mean that it is automatically allowed to have intercourse with that person. The RoT clearly states in multiple places that sexual intercourse is only allowed if a person can physically endure it. For example, on p. 525, it states (also see Figure 4):

“It is obligatory for a woman to let her husband have sex with her immediately when:

he asks her;
at home
and she can physically endure it…
As for when sex with her is not possible, such that having it would entail manifest harm to her, then she is not obliged to comply.”[11]

Reliance of the Traveler - intercourse
Figure 4: Screenshot of the Reliance of the Traveler stating that sexual intercourse is only allowed when a person can physically endure it (p. 525).
This was also the view of other scholars, including the founders of the 3 major schools, Imam Malik, Imam Shafi’i, and Imam Abu Haneefah.[12]

Also, in a separate fatwa, IslamQA noted that even if someone has entered puberty, it does not mean that they are necessarily able to have intercourse. Rather, it states this “varies from one environment and time to another”.[13]

The fact is that an appropriate age at which a person was considered physically able to endure sexual intercourse was never set by the classical scholars of Islam. Rather, this was left up to the parties concerned (i.e., the prospective bride and groom and the former’s father) to decide. Medical expertise could also be sought and called to testify in a Shariah court, as Jonathan Brown explained in his book Misquoting Muhammad: The Challenge and Choices of Interpreting the Prophet’s Legacy:

“[t]he norm that the ulama it comes to consensus and was only a general guideline: they prohibited sexual intercourse for girls ‘not able to undergo it,’ on the basis that otherwise sex could be physically harmful. if the groom and his wife or her guardian disagreed about her capacity for sex, a Shariah court judge would decide, perhaps after a female expert witness examined her. This was also based on the Prophet’s marriage to Aisha. The couple had concluded the marriage contract when Aisha was only six but had waited to consummate the marriage until she reached physical maturity. In the case of the Hanbali tradition followed by the Mufti of Saudi Arabia, sex was allowed when the bride was ‘at the age at which others like her have intercourse,’ specifying nine as the norm for suitability for sex on the basis of Aisha’s Hadith.”[14]

It is also important to note that sex with a person who was unable to endure it was condemned by scholars. For example, Brown notes the following:

“[h]istorical evidence from nineteenth-century Ottoman Palestine suggests that husbands having sexual intercourse with wives before they reached puberty did sometimes occur. But it was rare, condemned socially and censured by Shariah court judges. Shariah courts in French Algeria in the 1850s considered it equally despicable…”[15]

Also, this was not a later view. Classical scholars also condemned people who had sex with children. According to Rais et al. in an article in the Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Recent Innovations:

“n Islamic criminal law it is explained that sexual crimes against children can be divided into three forms, adultery (sexual intercourse without marriage), liwath (anal sexual intercourse), and sihaq (homosexuality/lesbian), each of whom has a clear sentence in Sharia Law. If the crime was categorized as adultery, then the punishment is jilid (whipping) for those who are not married and stoning if they have been married. It if was categorized as liwath and sihaq, then the punishment is in accordance with the differences of opinion of the ulama, namely stoning, or even death sentence. If the act is in the category of sexual abuse, then the punishment is ta’zir.”[16]

Thus, the preponderance of the evidence undoubtedly demonstrates that neither the Reliance of the Traveler nor classical Islamic law promoted “pedophilia”.
 
  • JFL
  • +1
Reactions: Draak77 and IAMNOTANINCEL
yandex99 said:
Nevertheless, it should be noted that just because a person is pubescent does not mean that it is automatically allowed to have intercourse with that person. The RoT clearly states in multiple places that sexual intercourse is only allowed if a person can physically endure it. For example, on p. 525, it states (also see Figure 4):

“It is obligatory for a woman to let her husband have sex with her immediately when:

he asks her;
at home
and she can physically endure it…
As for when sex with her is not possible, such that having it would entail manifest harm to her, then she is not obliged to comply.”[11]

Reliance of the Traveler - intercourse
Figure 4: Screenshot of the Reliance of the Traveler stating that sexual intercourse is only allowed when a person can physically endure it (p. 525).
This was also the view of other scholars, including the founders of the 3 major schools, Imam Malik, Imam Shafi’i, and Imam Abu Haneefah.[12]

Also, in a separate fatwa, IslamQA noted that even if someone has entered puberty, it does not mean that they are necessarily able to have intercourse. Rather, it states this “varies from one environment and time to another”.[13]

The fact is that an appropriate age at which a person was considered physically able to endure sexual intercourse was never set by the classical scholars of Islam. Rather, this was left up to the parties concerned (i.e., the prospective bride and groom and the former’s father) to decide. Medical expertise could also be sought and called to testify in a Shariah court, as Jonathan Brown explained in his book Misquoting Muhammad: The Challenge and Choices of Interpreting the Prophet’s Legacy:

“[t]he norm that the ulama it comes to consensus and was only a general guideline: they prohibited sexual intercourse for girls ‘not able to undergo it,’ on the basis that otherwise sex could be physically harmful. if the groom and his wife or her guardian disagreed about her capacity for sex, a Shariah court judge would decide, perhaps after a female expert witness examined her. This was also based on the Prophet’s marriage to Aisha. The couple had concluded the marriage contract when Aisha was only six but had waited to consummate the marriage until she reached physical maturity. In the case of the Hanbali tradition followed by the Mufti of Saudi Arabia, sex was allowed when the bride was ‘at the age at which others like her have intercourse,’ specifying nine as the norm for suitability for sex on the basis of Aisha’s Hadith.”[14]

It is also important to note that sex with a person who was unable to endure it was condemned by scholars. For example, Brown notes the following:

“[h]istorical evidence from nineteenth-century Ottoman Palestine suggests that husbands having sexual intercourse with wives before they reached puberty did sometimes occur. But it was rare, condemned socially and censured by Shariah court judges. Shariah courts in French Algeria in the 1850s considered it equally despicable…”[15]

Also, this was not a later view. Classical scholars also condemned people who had sex with children. According to Rais et al. in an article in the Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Recent Innovations:

“n Islamic criminal law it is explained that sexual crimes against children can be divided into three forms, adultery (sexual intercourse without marriage), liwath (anal sexual intercourse), and sihaq (homosexuality/lesbian), each of whom has a clear sentence in Sharia Law. If the crime was categorized as adultery, then the punishment is jilid (whipping) for those who are not married and stoning if they have been married. It if was categorized as liwath and sihaq, then the punishment is in accordance with the differences of opinion of the ulama, namely stoning, or even death sentence. If the act is in the category of sexual abuse, then the punishment is ta’zir.”[16]

Thus, the preponderance of the evidence undoubtedly demonstrates that neither the Reliance of the Traveler nor classical Islamic law promoted “pedophilia”.
Click to expand...
Dnr
 
  • JFL
Reactions: ashmeer
yandex99 said:
Nevertheless, it should be noted that just because a person is pubescent does not mean that it is automatically allowed to have intercourse with that person. The RoT clearly states in multiple places that sexual intercourse is only allowed if a person can physically endure it. For example, on p. 525, it states (also see Figure 4):

“It is obligatory for a woman to let her husband have sex with her immediately when:

he asks her;
at home
and she can physically endure it…
As for when sex with her is not possible, such that having it would entail manifest harm to her, then she is not obliged to comply.”[11]

Reliance of the Traveler - intercourse
Figure 4: Screenshot of the Reliance of the Traveler stating that sexual intercourse is only allowed when a person can physically endure it (p. 525).
This was also the view of other scholars, including the founders of the 3 major schools, Imam Malik, Imam Shafi’i, and Imam Abu Haneefah.[12]

Also, in a separate fatwa, IslamQA noted that even if someone has entered puberty, it does not mean that they are necessarily able to have intercourse. Rather, it states this “varies from one environment and time to another”.[13]

The fact is that an appropriate age at which a person was considered physically able to endure sexual intercourse was never set by the classical scholars of Islam. Rather, this was left up to the parties concerned (i.e., the prospective bride and groom and the former’s father) to decide. Medical expertise could also be sought and called to testify in a Shariah court, as Jonathan Brown explained in his book Misquoting Muhammad: The Challenge and Choices of Interpreting the Prophet’s Legacy:

“[t]he norm that the ulama it comes to consensus and was only a general guideline: they prohibited sexual intercourse for girls ‘not able to undergo it,’ on the basis that otherwise sex could be physically harmful. if the groom and his wife or her guardian disagreed about her capacity for sex, a Shariah court judge would decide, perhaps after a female expert witness examined her. This was also based on the Prophet’s marriage to Aisha. The couple had concluded the marriage contract when Aisha was only six but had waited to consummate the marriage until she reached physical maturity. In the case of the Hanbali tradition followed by the Mufti of Saudi Arabia, sex was allowed when the bride was ‘at the age at which others like her have intercourse,’ specifying nine as the norm for suitability for sex on the basis of Aisha’s Hadith.”[14]

It is also important to note that sex with a person who was unable to endure it was condemned by scholars. For example, Brown notes the following:

“[h]istorical evidence from nineteenth-century Ottoman Palestine suggests that husbands having sexual intercourse with wives before they reached puberty did sometimes occur. But it was rare, condemned socially and censured by Shariah court judges. Shariah courts in French Algeria in the 1850s considered it equally despicable…”[15]

Also, this was not a later view. Classical scholars also condemned people who had sex with children. According to Rais et al. in an article in the Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Recent Innovations:

“n Islamic criminal law it is explained that sexual crimes against children can be divided into three forms, adultery (sexual intercourse without marriage), liwath (anal sexual intercourse), and sihaq (homosexuality/lesbian), each of whom has a clear sentence in Sharia Law. If the crime was categorized as adultery, then the punishment is jilid (whipping) for those who are not married and stoning if they have been married. It if was categorized as liwath and sihaq, then the punishment is in accordance with the differences of opinion of the ulama, namely stoning, or even death sentence. If the act is in the category of sexual abuse, then the punishment is ta’zir.”[16]

Thus, the preponderance of the evidence undoubtedly demonstrates that neither the Reliance of the Traveler nor classical Islamic law promoted “pedophilia”.
Click to expand...
No one’s reading allat
 
IAMNOTANINCEL said:
Why do i give a fuck about what modern slaves think, only the truth matters
Click to expand...
okay but then how can christians say Islam is pedophilic when you aren't allowed to marry/consummate marriage until the girl has hit puberty which is almost always over the age of 12.
 
asdvek said:
u gonna cry faggot? "OMG NOO HE WAS A BAD PERSON IM GONNA CRY"

little bitch
Click to expand...
chill bro

just asking why you like him

i thought people only liked him for his looks

you could just answer
 
  • +1
Reactions: Draak77
jaycc said:
chill bro

just asking why you like him

i thought people only liked him for his looks

you could just answer
Click to expand...
This is the type of normies on the forum btw

These cucks are still religious, believe in morals

When u tell them u support someone like ramirez theyre like "omgg noo dude whatt thats so wrong :cry::cry:"

These mfs will be slaves for the rest of their lives

I dont know how someone can be this brainwashed

@IAMNOTANINCEL @CHRIST_764
 
  • JFL
Reactions: CHRIST_764 and IAMNOTANINCEL
asdvek said:
This is the type of normies on the forum btw

These cucks are still religious, believe in morals

When u tell them u support someone like ramirez theyre like "omgg noo dude whatt thats so wrong :cry::cry:"

These mfs will be slaves for the rest of their lives

I dont know how someone can be this brainwashed

@IAMNOTANINCEL @CHRIST_764
Click to expand...
so you like him because he didnt care about morals and that sets him apart from most people?

you could just say that

otherwise i would have to assume youre glazing him for his looks which is faggot behaviour
 
  • +1
Reactions: Draak77
jaycc said:
so you like him because he didnt care about morals and that sets him apart from most people?

you could just say that

otherwise i would have to assume youre glazing him for his looks which is faggot behaviour
Click to expand...
Shut the fuck up already
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

MrMaxwell
Discussion i cant lie, i know pedophilia is bad, BUT
Replies
9
Views
77
ToDelirium
ToDelirium
alurmo
Rage REVOLT AGAINST EGALITARIAN BAN TREATMENT
Replies
3
Views
32
alurmo
alurmo
mr123456
JFL CHARLIE KIRK BIASED AGAINST MANLETS 🧐
Replies
5
Views
56
mr123456
mr123456
EuphoricAsianNormie
Islam is more gook-coded than Christianity is
Replies
4
Views
75
tomahawk
tomahawk
Sandriguez
I think I just lost an argument to a dude defending pedophilia….
2
Replies
79
Views
361
Hihi21
Hihi21

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (Looksmaxers: 0, Bluepillers: 2)
Back
Top