Allah was a moon god which Mohammed repurposed- that's why that moon is such an important, prominent symbol among them, almost like a crucifix to a Christian. A lot of that happened in history, sort of like how the Romans copied the Greek pantheon.
"Whoever wills let them believe, and whoever wills let them disbelieve" [Quran 18:29]
hate dogs
Not mentioned in Quran, made up by the later Muslims for whatever practical reason.
rape is cool
You are only allowed to approach your wife, otherwise it's fornication and a major sin. Punishment for rape is straight up getting killed, no buts or ifs.
Yeah i know the Arab and Paki animals have left a sour taste in your mouth, and i'm not going to defend their actions, but you are still better off actually researching the religion itself before criticizing it.
The claim of Aisha being a child was made up on political grounds and is rejected by many Muslims, moreover many historical sources point at her being an adult:
Someone just posted a video last week which went over one of the supporting scriptures of this, word for word. It was and is common practice to marry girls this young in many Islamic regions.
Child brides are a phenomenon in every place with high rates of polygyny. Arabia has had high rates of polygyny for a very long time, thousands of years.
You think in terms of white and black. Just because child marriages were more common in certain places than others, doesn't mean it was accepted by everyone there. It's this erroneous belief of yours that "child marriage was usual in Arabia at the time" (while every source shows that it wasn't) which leads you to also easily believe that Muhammad would have likely engaged in that too.
Regarding the "supporting scripture of this", i will enlighten you about its origins if you know what hadiths are, and how they differ from Quran. Because i would prefer not having to make another wall of text explaining that.
Just because child marriages were more common in certain places than others, doesn't mean it was accepted by everyone there.
Yes it does. The rules of these societies are mostly based on cultural norms.
It's this erroneous belief of yours that "child marriage was usual in Arabia at the time"
No it isn’t. Whats more, you have nothing to base that on. There are copious rules governing the marriage of small children to men in the islamic scriptures (such as the “option of puberty” which allows a girl to reject an arranged marriage at maturity, which is nine) and theres only one reason for that to be the case. Theres nothing comparable to these practices in European history because Europeans didn’t marry 9 year olds.
Does it not say in Sahih Bukhari 5134 that the prophet married Aisha at 6 and consummated the marriage at 9? There are similar passages about the polygynists in the OT.
In arid places, pastoralism is the main economic model for obvious reasons. For some reason pastoralism makes polygyny highly practical. Its not clear why but virtually all pastoralists are polygynists. Perhaps it has to do with the liquidity of wealth (goats can be traded more easily than land.) When the most wealthy men are permitted more than one female, it creates a scarcity of available females. This causes dowries to become negative (i.e., men pay a bride price to obtain a bride, rather than the reverse of a father paying a groom to take his daughter. That never happened in europe. ) Because fathers can make money off marrying their daughters, they tend to do so at the earliest opportunity. Creating a larger age range of sexual availability for females helps to mitigate the scarcity of sexual woman-hours relative to sexual man-hours. This is why its a certainty that polygynous societies accept far younger brides than the norm. It is a biological certainty , not free will.
There are no polygynous cultures that do not have “child brides” who’s marriage age is unacceptably low to Europeans. None. The more polygyny which occurs in a culture, the larger the age gap between bride and groom. This is a very predictable phenomenon.
Theres always variation in a population but the average behavior is relavant. The average age of females at marriage in places like arabia are shockingly low and polygyny rates were and are some of the highest in the world. Just look at their royal family.
Polygyny causes child brides. Period. Its very black and white. With high rates of monogamy there are no child brides. None. You cannot accept the truth on the subject because it makes your religion and your culture look bad. I cant help it. Its true. We know what the phenomenon of child brides is caused by. Men who like little girls out-reproduce men who like grown women by a large margin in polygynist cultures. Its genetic. And its not going away in 100 years.
The rules of these societies are mostly based on cultural norms.
It's odd to me that an American misses the prospect of heterogeneousness in a nation. There are LGBTP freaks in the US, doesn't mean they are viewed normally by everyone. Same for child marriage and Islamic socities. Sometimes these get "tolerated" with a frown, but few wholeheartedly support it and even fewer practise it. If this was truly a cultural norm in Muslim socities, then WAY more girls should be married off at a young age considering they are a "mere murden" who will eventually get married off anyway. You mentioned another factor too, making money off selling daughters early. Yet most fathers still choose to wait until maturity, precisely because their hearts won't allow it. In most places Muslim girls marry in their early 20s, even in Arabia (excluding Yemen). Subtract a few years and this figure applies to the era Muhammad lived as well. We know that Muhammad refused to marry off his daughter Fatima because... she was too young (15 at the time). Later his son-in-law Ali also refused to marry off his daughter Umm Kulthum (13 at the time) for the same reason. Actually you can compare the marriage ages of the famous women from the time, it will give you an idea.
See Hel, your view of Islamic socities is so backwards that you keep confidently applying your theories there as if your subjects are some nigger or abo tribes. You are more educated on this geography than most here, and even then there's so much you get wrong. Say, you thought the marriage age in Arabia was shockingly low when in fact 60% of university students there are females who won't settle down until they become "strong and independent" to not depend on their greasy men. So please, distill the current image you have of us and actually do research about our cultures; talk to people from Morocco to Indonesia, look up for Youtube vlogs, or just ask me, i don't know...
There are copious rules governing the marriage of small children to men in the islamic scriptures
Historically the legal marriage age was also quite low for European women. Yet in practise they were married off much later. So who cares what the old jurisdictional bastards write. They had nothing to do except make up as many rules as they can since it was their job. But we are talking about the societal norms. You think any Muslim knows that Ahmad bin Hanbal, one of the towering figures in Sunni Islam's law, gave fatwa about jerking off with the hand of one's baby wife if he can't constraint himself? (it's real btw).
We know Hadiths are oral reports/accounts so very much subject to changes. I read your (presumably) write-up on Medium and remain unconvinced she was a teen. The debates I've seen seem to be regarding whether she was nine or twelve when raped (consummated lol). Whether or not this was widely practiced at the time is irrelevant. Are you muslim? Not sure why you feel the need to defend a red-haired, moon-worshipping, pedophile warlord.
There's only one "sahih" hadith which mentions that she was 6, while in my article i listed quite a few which challenges it. I mean at the end of the day hadiths are still bunch of political or superstitious garbage based on rumors, but if they were to be taken at face value then the evidence for her adult age weighs heavier.
The Muslim "scholars" are all bunch of old perverts who will try to defend the most henious of the accusations hurled at Muhammad (which there are quite a lot, the pedophile narrative is a drop in the ocean). What they think is irrelevant, i'm only interested in why they think. Because it's written in some book that some guy heard another guy who heard another guy who heard another guy that Aisha was a child? Screw that. I would laugh at your face if you brought this up as evidence in real life, just as many Muslims would (we are not a monolithic group contrary to what Westerners believe).
I mean at the end of the day hadiths are still bunch of political or superstitious garbage based on rumors,
Agreed but Islamic thought doesn’t take that position. Sharia law is based in part on the content of the Hadiths
evidence for her adult age weighs heavier.
What is her “adult” age? 9? 13? What does sharia say?
I think a lot of muslims have begun to shift their cultural norms in the face of scrutiny from Western countries and maybe because of changing economic models. I think its perhaps in the interests of modern turks and middle easterners to minimize this problem which was much worse in their pasts. So I don’t think you are looking at the problem objectively. I think people believe what they want to believe rather than what is described in black and white in your holy books and in contemporary literature of outsiders visiting your countries.
You have opened the Pandora's box. Let me be generous enough to summarize the whole story...
>Muhammad brings Quran, which can be summarized as "worship one god and be a good person".
>He notices that his fanboys are trying to write down stories about him (aka hadith) which he forbids, citing that he doesn't want Islam to be corrupted with these accounts like how it had happened with the previous scriptures.
>The subsequent Caliphs follow his policy, they burn down hadith collections they get their hands on and punish their authors.
>For about a hundred years the recording of hadith remains a taboo topic, although nothing stands in the way for people to privately speak of the supposed stories of Muhammad.
>During this time millions of hadith pop into existence, the vast majority of which are fabrications for a certain agenda (i can give you specific instances if you remind me later, including the story behind Aisha's age).
>Caliph Umar ibn Abdul Aziz (101 AH/719 CE) one day randomly decides that it would be a good idea to preserve Muhammad's life story so he hires servants (later known as muhaddith) to compile these hadith, the whole process essentially being going down the street and asking people who lived a century apart what they have heard of Muhammad.
>"Uhh i heard from this guy who heard from another guy who heard from another guy who heard that Muhammad loved green color/rode a donkey to heaven/ordered patience in adversity/married a child/dyed his beard red/ordered killing of infidels/split the moon in two/forbade pissing in the direction of Kaba/taught magical prayer words to heal ulcer/saved a baby's life/took slave women for enjoyment/etc.
>These rumors get sorted with a lackluster system called "hadith science" in order to tell apart true ones from the fake so they can later be written down in books, although the very nature of these rumors makes it impossible to verify them so a lot of fabrications still slip through (for reference Bukhari took 600k hadith and rejected all but 7k of them, but even most of these are still forgeries).
>Muhaddith realize that while most hadiths are just useless historical reports about Muhammad's supposed deeds, there are plenty which are straight up theological doctrines and which can be used to craft an entirely different scripture.
>Thus an even newer occupation is born, the "scholars" who will create a "Sharia" through these hadith, as well as newly developed methodologies like "Ijma, Ijtihad, Qiyas, Ray, etc".
>This new scripture is called "Sunnah", and with the help of the state (who found it useful for their agenda) they tried to tout to the public that Muhammad had not only brought Quran, but also Sunnah which somehow had remained hidden from the public for 200 years (although disagreements were a lot and to this day it keeps receiving updates).
>Gradually all Muslims become convinced to adhere to these new books and unquestioningly obey their "scholars", while the few who rejected the authority of hadith/sunnah get oppressed till they vanish from our sources for a thousand years after one point (say, according to famous Imam Shafi those who don't believe their hadiths should be chained, paraded and beaten while others called for their direct execution).
>These hadith/sunnah books become the bane of the Muslims as they stunt their intellectual growth, alienate them from Quran, create false priorities, fester violent and immoral behavior, develop a culture of oppression and intolerance, etc.
The good news is that due to the emergence of Internet the Muslims are slowly waking up to the poison their forefathers were fed, and currently Islam is having its own Protestant Reformation even if outsiders don't realize it. This has less to do with Western cultural norms/economic benefits and more with the newfound freedom of information. Which has led to large movements like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quranism And also scholars like https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xhrIUVQNpQ . He's from Saudi Arabia itself, although still has to larp as a traditionalist Sunni to avoid being executed (didn't help in his case though sadly).
Uhh i heard from this guy who heard from another guy who heard from another guy who heard that Muhammad loved green color/rode a donkey to heaven/ordered patience in adversity/married a child/dyed his beard red/ordered killing of infidels/split the moon in two/
You just got finished telling me I was wrong for doubting oral tradition on which the OT is based. You told me I was too narrow- minded or something like that. Now youre dismissing the hadiths out of hand because they are too gossipy? You have a bias. You like oral tradition when it serves your purposes.
Polygyny and its associated problems are manifest throughout the islamic world. Youre people are far more violent, corrupt, and exploitive,especially to women everywhere Islam and polygyny were established. Youre in denial of widespread marriage patterns that existed in the middle east well before Muhammed. Theres broad consensus on marriage patterns throughout the Islamic period and predating it.
Another problem caused by polygyny is slavery, because polygamists cannot support all their wives based on their own labor. This is why slavery was so much more widespread in muslim lands than in Christian lands and why christian Europeans banned slavery 1000 to 1500 years before muslims did. Slavery was/is key to the polygynous economic model. Muslim societies feature all the traits one expects in polygynous societies, including high violence/warfare, low status of women, “rape culture”, high slavery, child brides, extreme corruption and high wealth disparity. And the prevalence of these traits is commensurate to the frequency of polygyny.
The good news is that due to the emergence of Internet the Muslims are slowly waking up to the poison their forefathers were fed, a
Youre picking and choosing. Christians do the same thing— ignore the morally detestable behaviors of the bible while cherry-picking the warm, cuddly bromides. You should believe your islamic scholars, they understand the history of your religion. Your ancestors were conquered and forced to convert on threat of death, just like mine were.
You just got finished telling me I was wrong for doubting oral tradition on which the OT is based
Your memory serves you wrong. I was critical of you dubbing the whole OT as intentional propaganda, acknowledging that (just like hadith) we should instead be more careful when dealing with it. https://files.catbox.moe/oqndrk.png You call me biased, dear Hel, but what does that make you when you so confidently quote hadith books as evidence for Muhammad's crimes? Actually, you are lucky, i just remembered having written an article on this particular topic. https://medium.com/@Eliack_88/political-bias-in-the-hadith-literature-b4f4eea31e38 . To explain further: There was a pissing context between Sunnis and Shias who would each try to exalt their own respective figures. I grew up in a Shia family and was bombarded with countless hadith about the virtues of Ali. Likewise Sunni sources contain thousands of made up hadiths about the virtues of Aisha (most of which just happens to be narrated by her nephew named Hisham). These elevations extend to their age as well. Ali was 7 years old when he was admitted to Muhammad's household, a fact which Shias brag about to this day. So they dragged Aisha's age down to 6 and likewise brag about this (coincidentally also narrated by the same guy) even though plenty of sources demonstrate that she was an adult (recall my previous article, she was likely 17 when engaged and 19 when her father sent her to Muhammad's house). Do you want me to quote more blatantly political hadith? Or how about "sahih" hadith from sources like Bukhari which you would never accept, to show you how unreliable and absurd most of these are?
talks about polygyny
Why did you bring this up though. I thought we were discussing the history and reliability of hadith :|
youre picking and choosing. Christians do the same thing— ignore the morally detestable behaviors of the bible
Which detestable side of Quran do i ignore? I find it very telling that non-Muslims always try to attack Islam through hadiths aka rumors which even Western academics consider to be largely spurious. You wanna start a new topic, Hel? Quran has 6k+ verses, see how many detestable verses you can bring!
Your ancestors were conquered and forced to convert on threat of death
No? Arabs never managed to subdue the Turks, it was the other way around. We sent them with their tail between their legs, then conquered their lands and established our dynasties above them (Mamluks, Seljuks, Ottomans, Safavids, etc). Then a mix of factors (exposure, practical benefits, political strategy and spiritual resonance) convinced us to convert to Islam and become its main propagators.
I guess it depends on whether one believes the hadith, or only defends the qu'ran. The bible, qu'ran/hadith, torah/talmud are full of violence, rape, misogyny, slavery, and hatred. It is easy to cherry pick your views, but taken literally, they are a handbook for tribal warfare and survuval of the tribe at any cost. The new testament spins this buddhist vibe, in my opinion, was a means to water down the faith.
Kill them wherever you come upon them1 and drive them out of the places from which they have driven you out. For persecution2 is far worse than killing. And do not fight them at the Sacred Mosque unless they attack you there. If they do so, then fight them—that is the reward of the disbelievers.
Why did you take the verse out of its context? There are an insane amount of hints showing the verse is about Muslims defending themselves from the pagans who exiled and then attacked them. Even then, Quran instructs mercy.
"Fight in the cause of Allah ˹only˺ against those who wage war against you, but do not exceed the limits. Allah does not like transgressors. Kill them wherever you come upon them and drive them out of the places from which they have driven you out...But if they cease, then surely Allah is All-Forgiving, Most Merciful. Fight against them ˹if they persecute you˺ until there is no more persecution, and ˹your˺ devotion will be to Allah ˹alone˺. If they stop ˹persecuting you˺, let there be no hostility except against the aggressors. ˹There will be retaliation in˺ a sacred month for ˹an offence in˺ a sacred month,1 and all violations will bring about retaliation. So, if anyone attacks you, retaliate in the same manner.
65:4
Where does it say "yet"? The verse is talking about adult women who lately didn't have their periods, they are told to wait for 3 months as a pregnancy check. If they are later found pregnant they will wait until they give birth, if not they can divorce immediately. This way it's ensured that husbands don't accidentally divorce their wives while they are pregnant. It's an awesome verse for women actually.
4:34
It says if you have married a despicable person who causes trouble in the family, doesn't want to listen nor divorce then as the last step you can hit her with the intention of cooling her down (and not hurting per the next verse). Now assuming she had deserved it, and you had exhausted all other options, and divorce isn't on the table, what would your solution be? Let her keep abusing you since it's the feminist thing to do? How about you empathize with the poor husband instead? For reference i would support wives hitting scummy husbands too, if it will work. It's an unfortunate fact that once the "moral" options run out one has to resort to "pragmatic" ones instead. Like war after long peace talks. Eh...
[ + ] boekanier
[ - ] boekanier 1 point 1 weekApr 19, 2025 01:21:05 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 1 point 1 weekApr 19, 2025 09:21:34 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] Spaceman84
[ - ] Spaceman84 4 points 1 weekApr 18, 2025 23:57:47 ago (+4/-0)
[ + ] HelenHighwater
[ - ] HelenHighwater 2 points 1 weekApr 18, 2025 23:26:31 ago (+3/-1)
sex with kids (aisha)
kill infidel
hate dogs
rape is cool.
Never forget / never forgive.
[ + ] Sleazy
[ - ] Sleazy 2 points 1 weekApr 18, 2025 23:35:52 ago (+2/-0)
[ + ] HelenHighwater
[ - ] HelenHighwater 2 points 1 weekApr 18, 2025 23:47:12 ago (+2/-0)
[ + ] Sleazy
[ - ] Sleazy 1 point 1 weekApr 18, 2025 23:50:44 ago (+1/-0)
Allahu Akbar literally means "my god is greater than yours"
[ + ] Eliack
[ - ] Eliack -1 points 1 weekApr 19, 2025 05:41:43 ago (+0/-1)
[ + ] BloodyComet
[ - ] BloodyComet 1 point 1 weekApr 19, 2025 16:22:35 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] Eliack
[ - ] Eliack -1 points 1 weekApr 19, 2025 05:37:36 ago (+1/-2)
The claim of Aisha being a child was made up on political grounds and is rejected by many Muslims, moreover many historical sources point at her being an adult: https://medium.com/@Eliack_88/was-aisha-really-6-when-she-married-muhammed-dde8581466c8
"Whoever wills let them believe, and whoever wills let them disbelieve" [Quran 18:29]
Not mentioned in Quran, made up by the later Muslims for whatever practical reason.
You are only allowed to approach your wife, otherwise it's fornication and a major sin. Punishment for rape is straight up getting killed, no buts or ifs.
Yeah i know the Arab and Paki animals have left a sour taste in your mouth, and i'm not going to defend their actions, but you are still better off actually researching the religion itself before criticizing it.
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 1 point 1 weekApr 19, 2025 09:35:30 ago (+1/-0)
Someone just posted a video last week which went over one of the supporting scriptures of this, word for word. It was and is common practice to marry girls this young in many Islamic regions.
https://islamweb.net/en/fatwa/84343/the-prophet’s-sallallaahu-‘alayhi-wa-sallam-marriage-to-aaishah-may-allaah-be-pleased-with-her
Child brides are a phenomenon in every place with high rates of polygyny. Arabia has had high rates of polygyny for a very long time, thousands of years.
[ + ] Eliack
[ - ] Eliack 0 points 1 weekApr 19, 2025 10:57:54 ago (+0/-0)
Regarding the "supporting scripture of this", i will enlighten you about its origins if you know what hadiths are, and how they differ from Quran. Because i would prefer not having to make another wall of text explaining that.
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 1 point 1 weekApr 19, 2025 15:28:23 ago (+1/-0)
Yes it does. The rules of these societies are mostly based on cultural norms.
No it isn’t. Whats more, you have nothing to base that on. There are copious rules governing the marriage of small children to men in the islamic scriptures (such as the “option of puberty” which allows a girl to reject an arranged marriage at maturity, which is nine) and theres only one reason for that to be the case. Theres nothing comparable to these practices in European history because Europeans didn’t marry 9 year olds.
Does it not say in Sahih Bukhari 5134 that the prophet married Aisha at 6 and consummated the marriage at 9? There are similar passages about the polygynists in the OT.
In arid places, pastoralism is the main economic model for obvious reasons. For some reason pastoralism makes polygyny highly practical. Its not clear why but virtually all pastoralists are polygynists. Perhaps it has to do with the liquidity of wealth (goats can be traded more easily than land.) When the most wealthy men are permitted more than one female, it creates a scarcity of available females. This causes dowries to become negative (i.e., men pay a bride price to obtain a bride, rather than the reverse of a father paying a groom to take his daughter. That never happened in europe. ) Because fathers can make money off marrying their daughters, they tend to do so at the earliest opportunity. Creating a larger age range of sexual availability for females helps to mitigate the scarcity of sexual woman-hours relative to sexual man-hours. This is why its a certainty that polygynous societies accept far younger brides than the norm. It is a biological certainty , not free will.
There are no polygynous cultures that do not have “child brides” who’s marriage age is unacceptably low to Europeans. None. The more polygyny which occurs in a culture, the larger the age gap between bride and groom. This is a very predictable phenomenon.
Theres always variation in a population but the average behavior is relavant. The average age of females at marriage in places like arabia are shockingly low and polygyny rates were and are some of the highest in the world. Just look at their royal family.
Polygyny causes child brides. Period. Its very black and white. With high rates of monogamy there are no child brides. None. You cannot accept the truth on the subject because it makes your religion and your culture look bad. I cant help it. Its true. We know what the phenomenon of child brides is caused by. Men who like little girls out-reproduce men who like grown women by a large margin in polygynist cultures. Its genetic. And its not going away in 100 years.
[ + ] Eliack
[ - ] Eliack -1 points 1 weekApr 19, 2025 17:53:27 ago (+0/-1)
It's odd to me that an American misses the prospect of heterogeneousness in a nation. There are LGBTP freaks in the US, doesn't mean they are viewed normally by everyone. Same for child marriage and Islamic socities. Sometimes these get "tolerated" with a frown, but few wholeheartedly support it and even fewer practise it. If this was truly a cultural norm in Muslim socities, then WAY more girls should be married off at a young age considering they are a "mere murden" who will eventually get married off anyway. You mentioned another factor too, making money off selling daughters early. Yet most fathers still choose to wait until maturity, precisely because their hearts won't allow it. In most places Muslim girls marry in their early 20s, even in Arabia (excluding Yemen).
Subtract a few years and this figure applies to the era Muhammad lived as well. We know that Muhammad refused to marry off his daughter Fatima because... she was too young (15 at the time). Later his son-in-law Ali also refused to marry off his daughter Umm Kulthum (13 at the time) for the same reason. Actually you can compare the marriage ages of the famous women from the time, it will give you an idea.
See Hel, your view of Islamic socities is so backwards that you keep confidently applying your theories there as if your subjects are some nigger or abo tribes. You are more educated on this geography than most here, and even then there's so much you get wrong. Say, you thought the marriage age in Arabia was shockingly low when in fact 60% of university students there are females who won't settle down until they become "strong and independent" to not depend on their greasy men. So please, distill the current image you have of us and actually do research about our cultures; talk to people from Morocco to Indonesia, look up for Youtube vlogs, or just ask me, i don't know...
[ + ] NeverHappened
[ - ] NeverHappened 0 points 1 weekApr 19, 2025 11:57:25 ago (+0/-0)
The debates I've seen seem to be regarding whether she was nine or twelve when raped (consummated lol). Whether or not this was widely practiced at the time is irrelevant.
Are you muslim? Not sure why you feel the need to defend a red-haired, moon-worshipping, pedophile warlord.
[ + ] Eliack
[ - ] Eliack 0 points 1 weekApr 19, 2025 12:13:28 ago (+0/-0)
The Muslim "scholars" are all bunch of old perverts who will try to defend the most henious of the accusations hurled at Muhammad (which there are quite a lot, the pedophile narrative is a drop in the ocean). What they think is irrelevant, i'm only interested in why they think. Because it's written in some book that some guy heard another guy who heard another guy who heard another guy that Aisha was a child? Screw that. I would laugh at your face if you brought this up as evidence in real life, just as many Muslims would (we are not a monolithic group contrary to what Westerners believe).
[ + ] NeverHappened
[ - ] NeverHappened 0 points 1 weekApr 19, 2025 12:29:57 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 0 points 1 weekApr 19, 2025 15:41:47 ago (+0/-0)
Agreed but Islamic thought doesn’t take that position. Sharia law is based in part on the content of the Hadiths
What is her “adult” age? 9? 13? What does sharia say?
I think a lot of muslims have begun to shift their cultural norms in the face of scrutiny from Western countries and maybe because of changing economic models. I think its perhaps in the interests of modern turks and middle easterners to minimize this problem which was much worse in their pasts. So I don’t think you are looking at the problem objectively. I think people believe what they want to believe rather than what is described in black and white in your holy books and in contemporary literature of outsiders visiting your countries.
[ + ] Eliack
[ - ] Eliack 0 points 1 weekApr 19, 2025 18:42:53 ago (+0/-0)*
The good news is that due to the emergence of Internet the Muslims are slowly waking up to the poison their forefathers were fed, and currently Islam is having its own Protestant Reformation even if outsiders don't realize it. This has less to do with Western cultural norms/economic benefits and more with the newfound freedom of information.
Which has led to large movements like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quranism
And also scholars like https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xhrIUVQNpQ . He's from Saudi Arabia itself, although still has to larp as a traditionalist Sunni to avoid being executed (didn't help in his case though sadly).
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 1 point 1 weekApr 19, 2025 19:36:30 ago (+1/-0)
You just got finished telling me I was wrong for doubting oral tradition on which the OT is based. You told me I was too narrow- minded or something like that. Now youre dismissing the hadiths out of hand because they are too gossipy? You have a bias. You like oral tradition when it serves your purposes.
Polygyny and its associated problems are manifest throughout the islamic world. Youre people are far more violent, corrupt, and exploitive,especially to women everywhere Islam and polygyny were established. Youre in denial of widespread marriage patterns that existed in the middle east well before Muhammed. Theres broad consensus on marriage patterns throughout the Islamic period and predating it.
Another problem caused by polygyny is slavery, because polygamists cannot support all their wives based on their own labor. This is why slavery was so much more widespread in muslim lands than in Christian lands and why christian Europeans banned slavery 1000 to 1500 years before muslims did. Slavery was/is key to the polygynous economic model. Muslim societies feature all the traits one expects in polygynous societies, including high violence/warfare, low status of women, “rape culture”, high slavery, child brides, extreme corruption and high wealth disparity. And the prevalence of these traits is commensurate to the frequency of polygyny.
Youre picking and choosing. Christians do the same thing— ignore the morally detestable behaviors of the bible while cherry-picking the warm, cuddly bromides. You should believe your islamic scholars, they understand the history of your religion. Your ancestors were conquered and forced to convert on threat of death, just like mine were.
[ + ] Eliack
[ - ] Eliack 0 points 1 weekApr 20, 2025 06:54:35 ago (+0/-0)*
Your memory serves you wrong. I was critical of you dubbing the whole OT as intentional propaganda, acknowledging that (just like hadith) we should instead be more careful when dealing with it.
https://files.catbox.moe/oqndrk.png
You call me biased, dear Hel, but what does that make you when you so confidently quote hadith books as evidence for Muhammad's crimes? Actually, you are lucky, i just remembered having written an article on this particular topic. https://medium.com/@Eliack_88/political-bias-in-the-hadith-literature-b4f4eea31e38 . To explain further: There was a pissing context between Sunnis and Shias who would each try to exalt their own respective figures. I grew up in a Shia family and was bombarded with countless hadith about the virtues of Ali. Likewise Sunni sources contain thousands of made up hadiths about the virtues of Aisha (most of which just happens to be narrated by her nephew named Hisham). These elevations extend to their age as well. Ali was 7 years old when he was admitted to Muhammad's household, a fact which Shias brag about to this day. So they dragged Aisha's age down to 6 and likewise brag about this (coincidentally also narrated by the same guy) even though plenty of sources demonstrate that she was an adult (recall my previous article, she was likely 17 when engaged and 19 when her father sent her to Muhammad's house). Do you want me to quote more blatantly political hadith? Or how about "sahih" hadith from sources like Bukhari which you would never accept, to show you how unreliable and absurd most of these are?
Why did you bring this up though. I thought we were discussing the history and reliability of hadith :|
Which detestable side of Quran do i ignore? I find it very telling that non-Muslims always try to attack Islam through hadiths aka rumors which even Western academics consider to be largely spurious. You wanna start a new topic, Hel? Quran has 6k+ verses, see how many detestable verses you can bring!
No? Arabs never managed to subdue the Turks, it was the other way around. We sent them with their tail between their legs, then conquered their lands and established our dynasties above them (Mamluks, Seljuks, Ottomans, Safavids, etc). Then a mix of factors (exposure, practical benefits, political strategy and spiritual resonance) convinced us to convert to Islam and become its main propagators.
[ + ] HelenHighwater
[ - ] HelenHighwater 1 point 1 weekApr 19, 2025 12:52:01 ago (+2/-1)
https://quran.com/en/al-baqarah/191
Kill them wherever you come upon them1 and drive them out of the places from which they have driven you out. For persecution2 is far worse than killing. And do not fight them at the Sacred Mosque unless they attack you there. If they do so, then fight them—that is the reward of the disbelievers.
https://legacy.quran.com/65/4
If your wife hasn't had their period yet, just wait three months. How does one acquire a wife that hasn't experienced menstruation yet?
https://quran.com/en/an-nisa/34
etc. etc.
[ + ] Eliack
[ - ] Eliack -1 points 1 weekApr 19, 2025 13:39:04 ago (+0/-1)
"Fight in the cause of Allah ˹only˺ against those who wage war against you, but do not exceed the limits. Allah does not like transgressors. Kill them wherever you come upon them and drive them out of the places from which they have driven you out...But if they cease, then surely Allah is All-Forgiving, Most Merciful. Fight against them ˹if they persecute you˺ until there is no more persecution, and ˹your˺ devotion will be to Allah ˹alone˺. If they stop ˹persecuting you˺, let there be no hostility except against the aggressors. ˹There will be retaliation in˺ a sacred month for ˹an offence in˺ a sacred month,1 and all violations will bring about retaliation. So, if anyone attacks you, retaliate in the same manner.
The verse is talking about adult women who lately didn't have their periods, they are told to wait for 3 months as a pregnancy check. If they are later found pregnant they will wait until they give birth, if not they can divorce immediately. This way it's ensured that husbands don't accidentally divorce their wives while they are pregnant. It's an awesome verse for women actually.
For reference i would support wives hitting scummy husbands too, if it will work. It's an unfortunate fact that once the "moral" options run out one has to resort to "pragmatic" ones instead. Like war after long peace talks. Eh...