May 10, 2006
Matured faster? Right.
The third option, of course, is just to deny that Mohammed ever did this and claim the hadiths are wrong. Which would solve a lot of problems. Or, maybe Mohammed was just a pedophile, in which case......
The Sun (hat tip: Peter):
A MAN aged 37 has been arrested after an 11-year-old girl gave birth to a baby boy....The man and the girl are thought to be visitors to the UK from Africa, possibly from Somalia.
The baby was kept at the hospital in a special care unit, and the girl was taken into the care of Hillingdon Borough Council. The man was not held immediately.
However, police arrested him in Uxbridge yesterday and he was questioned about the pregnancy. He was released on bail until July while cops investigate.
Posted by: Rusty at
03:01 PM
| Comments (7)
| Add Comment
Post contains 179 words, total size 1 kb.
The government had to enact special law to ban early marriages and the ban is also sometimes violated in this century by some superstitious people.
If we were to compare medieval social practices in todays context, yes many Indian Hindu/Muslim/Christian/Buddhists were pedophiles too in earlier days. It doesn't have anything to do with religion.
Posted by: Rezwan at May 11, 2006 03:33 AM (4tUkB)
People have been killing each other since the beginning. Sometimes for greed, sometimes for hate, sometimes for love. But would we say that the jihadists killing of the infidel has nothing to do with religion because it's been done by others? Maybe not a perfect analogy, but close enough.
Posted by: Oyster at May 11, 2006 06:10 AM (YudAC)
Posted by: john Ryan at May 11, 2006 07:32 AM (TcoRJ)
Posted by: Improbulus Maximus at May 11, 2006 08:13 AM (0yYS2)
Posted by: sandpiper at May 11, 2006 12:55 PM (stdEd)
Surely we are taking much heed to such claims. In the same way we also stereotype the Jihadists ideologies as ideologies of 25% people of the world.
You will see that Muslims brought up in different regions and cultures act and behave differently. It is wrong to think that a Muslim's thought in Afghanistan and a Muslim immigrant's thought in US would be the same. It all depends on the person's education, upbringing, exposure and freedom to define how one takes one's religion.
The real problem is with those Muslims who in the 21st century want to clutch to his religion, and want to define him/herself by the religion. Instead of regarding religion as a pathway with rational reasoning, he/she is more interested in interpretation of a 1500 old text according to his preference.
We need to identify those areas and work towards bringing freedom, democracy and enlightment to these people, not indulging in the discussion of Ayesha's age or the medieval practices. We need to raise our voices against those apologists who support the jihadi ideologies.
"Religion is the idol of the mob; it adores everything it does not understand." -
Posted by: Rezwan at May 12, 2006 02:37 AM (tX8En)
And you proved my point in regards to those who are brought up in other more advanced cultures. While they may see it as wrong, most do not speak out against it. They are more compelled to keep their head down and their mouth shut and when cornered on the issue they may admit quietly that they would not do such a thing, but will invariably quote the Koran and say others who do are within their rights.
The day we cannot indulge in a discussion about the systemic abuse of children is the day we give up.
Posted by: Oyster at May 12, 2006 05:29 AM (YudAC)
34 queries taking 0.0216 seconds, 162 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.