Islam: A Religion of Lies...

[Pliny]

Originally Posted by Walks_in_islam

Is Jas 2:19 ("queen" JV) the missing verse that defines the sin?

Another ignorant statement that only serves to underscore the depravity of islam.

Originally Posted by Walks_in_islam

Once again:

Mohammad and Aisha's marriage was arranged when she was 6. It was consummated at 9. They stayed married until he died.

I am glad you recognize that Muhammad consummated his marriage when she was a child of 9 years old. The first hint of intellectual honesty. Of course it is well documented so you can’t very well deny it can you? What is fundamentally tragic is that YOU support such a heinous act. Pedophilia is okay to you, your unholy man and your deity. What a sick, sick, sick religion you support.

Originally Posted by Walks_in_islam

Such practices followed traditions that go back to the beginning of time and were certainly followed long afterwards.

ROTFL - This in effect means that you believe “traditions” and “practices” trump your depraved writings. LOL! Your “scripture” is subject to “traditions” and “practices”… ROTFL

“Traditions” and “practices” are not morally equivalent to your unholy man’s actions or your deity’s “blessing” upon such a heinous act. Traditions and practices are the result of depraved men establishing a system of government. Why do Mohammedans seek Sharia law? Because Sharia law is supposed to be divinely inspired law that trumps the depraved attempts of humanity to govern itself such as “traditions” and “practices”. Therefore, your attempt to equate those histories with your deity and unholy man is a miserable failure and reveals that you don’t care about truth in any form.

The truth is that Mohammedans believe sharia is the “word of god” not traditions. They follow Mohammed; Hence, the classification of Mohammedans. They do not look to traditions or ancient practices to defend child brides. They look to the example and teachings of Muhammad.

Mohammedans only cite ancient “practices” and “traditions” to keep uninformed people from looking at their pedophile prophet and deity. They attempt a moral equivalency where there is none. Only Muhammad and their deity have the force of sharia and it is to sharia that they look to for this abhorrent culture of manipulation and exploitation.

As far as “following long afterwards” this is true among Mohammedans. They continue to practice this custom today.

“Iran’s Ayatollah Khomeini himself married a ten-year-old girl when he was twenty-eight. Khomeini called marriage to a prepubescent girl “a divine blessing,” and advised the faithful to give their own daughters away accordingly: “Do your best to ensure that your daughters do not see their first blood in your house.” When he took power in Iran, he lowered the legal marriageable age of girls to nine, in accord with Muhammad’s example.”
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2014/03/tu...last-ten-years

What an utterly depraved religious system…

Originally Posted by Walks_in_islam

Yes, an ancient rabbi acknowledged the practice.

Again, Mohammedans do not look to Jewish Rabbi’s for their Islamic law. They look to Muhammad’s example and teachings from his deity. It is quite entertaining to see Mohammedans cite Jews for their defense. ROTFL!

The truth is they don’t care what Jews think. They simply look for anything that will deflect attention away from the facts. When majority Islamic nations seek to ban child marriages the muslim clerics fight against it because they know it puts their unholy prophet in a bad light. Therefore they prefer to continue the practice of child brides in honor of their defunct pedophile prophet. This culture of manipulation and exploitation continues today by muslims. As pointed out above Iran’s Ayatollah Khomeini married a 10 year old girl. When he came to power he reduced the marriageable age for girls to 9 years old following Muhammad’s example.

The Ayatollah Khomeini did not cite ancient traditions and practices for justification. He cited Muhammad’s example. Thus, all this bologna is simply a smoke screen. It would be nice for you to stop with your prevarications. However, I will not hold my breath. You would rather justify this sick twisted behavior than admit the truth.

Originally Posted by Walks_in_islam

Church Jurists acknowledged the practice

In the 12th century, the jurist Gratian, an influential founder of Canon law in medieval Europe, accepted the age of puberty for marriage to be between 12 and 14, but acknowledged consent to be meaningful if the children were older than 7. There were authorities with a claim that consent could take place earlier. Marriage would then be valid as long as neither of the two parties annulled the marital agreement before reaching puberty, or if they had already consummated the marriage. It should be noted that Judges honored marriages based on mutual consent at ages younger than 7, in spite of what Gratian had said; there are recorded marriages of 2 and 3 year olds

This would be laughable if it was not so tragic. Once again the Mohammedan is seeking to make a moral equivalency where there is none. Not a single muslim would cite this as justification for continuing the practice of child brides. A person may question why that is. The answer is simple. They could care less what a 12th century jurist said. Also, this is extremely poor “scholarship”. The resident Mohammedan makes quotes without giving the reader the benefit of checking his quotation if they cared to. I don’t because, it’s simply another prevarication on his part.

This has nothing to do with what the example his prophet left behind. His prophet married a 6 year old girl, consummating, that marriage when she was only 9 years old. This was done without the knowledge of a 12th century jurist, a Jewish Rabbi or anything else. It stands and falls upon the merits, or lack thereof, of his religious system. Mohammedans do not look to these as any authority within sharia and certainly no Apostolic looks to these as divinely inspired precepts or principles to live by. There is no moral equivalence here. Only a failed attempt to justify the unjustifiable.

Mohammedans do not cite any of this in their justification for maintaining such an absurdly heinous act. They only cite the example of Muhammad and their “divinely inspired” writings. That makes all this nonsense.


TBC