The ‘prophet’ Muhammad was a pedophile.
Neener, neener. You can’t stop me from saying it.
The ‘prophet’ Muhammad was a pedophile.
That’s because I live in a place that, despite what many claim, values and protects free speech and blasphemy. There are no laws in the United States that allow the government to fine or jail me for saying objective facts like how the Islamic ‘prophet’ Muhammad was a pedophile, because I can’t think of a better word to describe someone who marries a 6 year old child then consummates the marriage when she is nine years old.
But the people of Europe aren’t so fortunate. Last week, the European Court of Human Rights convicted an Austrian woman (known as “E. S.”) of “disparaging religion” and fined her €480 ( about $550 in USD).
Save the planet – trash religion. Get our hoodie, shirt, and more in our store!
In a lecture she gave, E. S. had the audacity to say “One of the biggest problems we are facing today is that Muhammad is seen as the ideal man, the perfect human, the perfect Muslim. That means that the highest commandment for a male Muslim is to imitate Muhammad, to live his life. This does not happen according to our social standards and laws.” She went on to explain that according to Islamic doctrine, Muhammad married a girl named Aisha when she was six or seven years old, adding “What do we call it, if it is not pedophilia?”
My friend David McAfee at Friendly Atheist reported:
The ECHR found that the earlier conviction didn’t violate the woman’s free speech rights. She just crossed a line in 2009 when she delivered two seminars on “Basic Information on Islam” and made the comments. The ECHR said in its decision that the “pedophilia” remarks weren’t objective, lacked historical background, and weren’t intended to spur public debate. Therefore she was just being incendiary and mean.
That leaves me wondering what they consider to be the objective definition of pedophilia and what historical background was lacking as it came from Islamic doctrine… And we are now debating it publicly, no?
Narrated by Aisha
The Prophet engaged me when I was a girl of six (years). We went to Medina and stayed at the home of Bani-al-Harith bin Khazraj. Then I got ill and my hair fell down. Later on my hair grew (again) and my mother, Um Ruman, came to me while I was playing in a swing with some of my girl friends. She called me, and I went to her, not knowing what she wanted to do to me. She caught me by the hand and made me stand at the door of the house. I was breathless then, and when my breathing became Allright, she took some water and rubbed my face and head with it. Then she took me into the house. There in the house I saw some Ansari women who said, “Best wishes and Allah’s Blessing and a good luck.” Then she entrusted me to them and they prepared me (for the marriage). Unexpectedly Allah’s Apostle came to me in the forenoon and my mother handed me over to him, and at that time I was a girl of nine years of age. [Sahih al-Bukhari Volume 5, Book 58, Number 234
This was taken directly from Sahih al-Bukhari, which is one of the hadiths – the teachings of Muhammad – in Sunni Islam, the largest denomination of Islam. This particular passage was narrated by Aisha, who says she met Mo when she was six years old and married him when she was nine.
And sure, there were cultural differences when Muhammad was alive about 1400 years ago. I’m not in favor of judging people entirely based on current moral standards. People lived to be about 35-40 on average back then. But still, if you claim to be a prophet who flew up to heaven on a winged horse-type thing, one would think that you’d have the foresight to know that 1400 years later, any decent person believes there’s something severely wrong with the whole “sex with kids” thing.
So, what do you call that if not pedophilia?
The ‘prophet’ Muhammad was a pedophile.
I can predict a lot of comments on this post, which will echo that of Ben Affleck’s thoughts about any criticism of Islam:
First of all, Islam is not a race. If it was, then Sinéad O’Connor, who recently converted to Islam, would be in a world of trouble.
Sinead O’Connor, under the new name “Shuhada’ Davitt”, converted to Islam and posted a video of herself singing the Adhan (call to prayer), which is prohibited to be sung by women. This prohibition is believed by the vast majority of Muslims. pic.twitter.com/jL39YWVSa4
— LALO DAGACH (@LaloDagach) October 26, 2018
… Or at least more trouble than she’s in already.
People are quick to claim any criticism of Islam as being “Islamophobic.” But it’s not. It’s using the actual teachings of the most popular denomination of Islam to criticize the religion itself. In order for it to be “phobic” in any way, it would have to come from a place of irrational fear, which this does not. It’s simply an objective fact, from the religion’s own teachings. After all, I criticize Christianity and Christian “leaders” all the time, and nobody says I’m racist or bigoted. Hell, I even write emails directly to Christians who try to proselytize to my kids and nobody says I’m Christianphobic:
“Islamophobia” is itself a nonsense term. Some have criticized those who criticize Islam because of the current political climate, caused by the hateful and xenophobic rhetoric Donald Trump and the alt-right engages in. This isn’t based in an irrational fear of Islam, it’s based on an irrational fear of people who aren’t white – a revolting amalgamation of racism and xenophobia. And that makes this completely different from alt-righters. I mean, people on the alt-right also poop on a (hopefully?) regular basis. Just because you might share some commonalities with someone does not mean you endorse or support their rhetoric.
This is a criticism of an idea, not of people. I’ve never criticized individual Christians, Muslims, Hindus, Jews, or any religious believer because of their faith. I’ve never even criticized Christians, Muslims, etc. as a whole in a disparaging manner. Those who engage in behavior like this are wrong for doing so.
Even when I do criticize individuals like Pope Francis, I’m not criticizing him for his religious belief, I’m criticizing him for his despicable inaction when faced with the systemic sexual abuse problem in the Catholic Church.
So again, the ‘prophet’ Muhammad was a pedophile.
I meme’d Faisal al Mutar a few years ago (which he reminded me about first thing when we met), and this quote drives home the entire point I’m making:
We should all be free to criticize ideas. No idea, belief, or ideology is above criticism.
Only when you drift into attacking people – like Mike Pence did when he falsely claimed that there are “Middle Easterners” in the migrant caravan – does it move from criticism of an ideology into hate speech. That makes an enormous difference and is what sets those who criticize Islam for factual and historical reasons apart from those who are simply xenophobic bigots.
This ruling is extremely troublesome for free speech and the criticism of ideologies. While it doesn’t supersede laws in all European countries, it’s part of what seems to be a growing trend of policing “free” speech. It’s punishing for thought crimes – things that harm no one – and seeks to shut down discussion to protect people’s feelings.
Your feelings should not be damaged by someone criticizing a belief you have. The only reason this would happen is if your beliefs are rooted in feelings, rather than objective facts. I’m not saying that you can’t feel passionately about issues. Someone criticizing a belief you hold isn’t a personal attack on you. It’s an attack on an idea. The only logical reason to be offended by someone criticizing and idea you have is if your ideas are rooted in feelings.
So one more time I’ll say that, objectively, the ‘prophet’ Muhammad was a pedophile.
Embrace the pain and get our shirt in our store! Life is only temporary anyway.
And I know that there are many people out there who do nothing but lob personal attacks at “libtard cucks” like myself. These people are what we call “idiots” and do not deserve a seat at the grown up’s table. They are not trying to engage in honest debate about issues, they’re simply looking to get an emotional riser from you to fill the infinite void that is filling in for their lack of personality. Or maybe they’re just a Russian bot. Mute them. Block them. Don’t let the bastards ruin your day.
If your ideas are rooted in facts and evidence, then use facts and evidence to defend your ideas. If the person you’re debating with can’t do that themselves… Well, then you know they don’t have facts to back it up.
And in tumultuous times like these, we would all do better to lower our voices and strengthen our arguments by using facts and evidence. Silencing criticism is decidedly not beneficial.
Comment using Facebook