• geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 months ago

    The pelgrimage to Mekka where Muslims worship uuuuuhhhhh…

    Mohammed! Their God!

    Which uhhhh

    frantically pastes generic poorly researched Wikipedia article full of contradictions

    Pedophile!

    Don’t look up the history of anyone from before the 20th century when these supposed Christians suddenly reached enlightenment. The inclusion of Christians is especially weird since they always pushed for younger ages of marriage than Muslims in the middle ages. Back then the Muslims were supposedly prudes.

    Wonder why everyone didn’t wait until they were 35 to get married in a time where the average life expectancy was 31 years.

    • nonailsleft@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      If my life expectancy drops I don’t think it’s going to suddenlyb make me stick my dong into a 9 year old

      • geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        Presentism is the fallacy you are looking for.

        Humans have even changed their bodies since the middle ages. Menstrual periods are later. Maturity goes slower. People don’t die in 30 years.

        Children having their parents die when they are 10 and get married at 20. Or children getting married at 10 and having their parents die at 20. All great choices which we don’t have to make and can moral high ground about.

        I could ask why you think dating an 18 year old is fine but a 17 year old is not. Because modern research suggests the brain only finishes development at 25. But of course our sense of “morals” is solely based on arbitrary laws in < present time > in < present location >.

        • Anamnesis@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          Muslims do not generally believe in cultural or moral relativism. Allah is the one true God, his moral teachings are objectively correct. Why offer them a way out that they themselves aren’t able to coherently accept?

          Besides, cultural relativism is nonsense. If someone tells me it’s okay to molest children, their perspective is not “just as valid” as mine. They’re a monster.

          • geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            Society committing Genocide on children and calling them terrorists suddenly are very worried about when a girl of menstrual age willingly gets married.

            • sunzu@kbin.run
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 months ago

              Bro this melt down… stop.

              1. Calling 10yo a girl mestrual age is really stretching what that means. Stop digging your own hole. You really need to consider what you are really saying here. The optics are beyond bad. I hope you really don’t think that.

              2. This has nothing to with the Israel’s ethnic cleansing campaign in Gaza. Pretty sure most people can agree that Mohammed was a pedo and Israel is a committing war crimes.

              Frankly you mixing the two together is not appreciated.

              • geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                3 months ago

                Who is having a meltdown, you?

                If she had a menstruation she was of menstrual age. And if she then willingly got married that’s her own decision.

                You were bringing up moral “evolution”.

                Simply pointing out that a society electing leaders knowing they will commit Genocide on little babies does not appear morally evolved really hits a nerve.

                Would you suggest I refer to all Americans as “baby murderers”?

                • sunzu@kbin.run
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  3 months ago

                  Age is just a number… Prison is just a place.

                  I am assumining you would let 50yo geatric clown fuck your child at 10?

                  Obviously as long as she consents!

          • sunzu@kbin.run
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            Not sure why in 2024 we still making excuses for pedohiles…

            Christian clergy notorious pedos, nothing is done…

            Other cultures bending out of shape to explain away their own pedophiles as this thread shows…

            I am assume these are adult people and likely men. Are they pathetic or are they just pushing pedophilia?

        • nonailsleft@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          Ah, the Great Cascade of excusing pedophilia

          It didn’t happen

          Her age was ‘unclear’

          Her 9-year-old body was ‘ready for it’ <-- You are here

          He had to plow her, as her parents could die any day <-- Moving here

          Why would there be a problem with a 50-year old ‘dating’ a 9-year old <-- Nice to see that thrown in

          She loved him

          She was begging for it

          Furthermore, your excuses just confirm Sunzu’s allegation that ‘modern’ Muslims have not ‘moved on’ from these practices - they use them to excuse legalizing and enabling pedophilia today. Muhammad set the bar for them. And he set it very, very low.

          • geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            You striped away points never mentioned and did not answer the question about the age of 25.

            100 years ago the age of consent in Delaware was 7 years old. Your argument has been a non issue for the entire history of humanity until last 100 year until your magic universal definition of a chil turning adult at 18 took place.

            And let’s not forget the age of consent being 12 in many American places up to recently.

            But nonetheless nobody takes this dumb moral highgrounding serious as the secular west is currently committing a Genocide on mostly children in a concentration camp in Gaza. But those are of course not children they are “terrorists” who are allowed to be killed.

    • el_abuelo@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      Isn’t the average life expectancy caused by infant death? Anyone living through pubity probably had a good chance of living to 70.

          • geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            The average age going up appears to directly correlate with the heightening of the definition of adulthood.

            If humans could live to 1000 we would call a 600 year old dating a 40 year old a pedo

            • el_abuelo@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              3 months ago

              In 1885 the legal age of consent in the UK was raised to 16. The average life expectancy of adults had barely changed.

              So while this disproves your correlation theory, it’s also important to remind the reader that correlation is not the same as causation. Society, the role of government, the rule of law and its encroachment on personal choice changed hugely from the 13th Century and 17th Century - I would therefore claim that society would not have been accepting of paedophilia in the 13th Century despite the lack of law.

              Sexual desire of prepubescent children has, as far as I know, never been considered the norm.

              • geneva_convenience@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                3 months ago

                According to random internet person you are incorrect. Though I have not fact checked this much your comment sounds extremely improbable.

                https://genealogy.stackexchange.com/questions/1595/what-is-the-earliest-age-a-boy-in-england-could-get-married-in-the-1800s

                'You will find a lot of confusion in the discussion of this legislation on the web. My understanding is that, while they did introduce an element of parental involvement in approving a marriage, the Acts left the accepted minimum ages where they were in traditional canon (that is church) law. So it was possible for a girl to marry at 12 and a boy at 14. Even if the parents disagreed with the decision, there were perfectly legal ways in which the marriage could take place.

                And we are still all teaching teenage “kids” about sexuality and “experimenting” is totally fine. Do the sex thing “kids”! As long as they do it with other “kids”…

                As for the rest of the Euro moral high grounding I don’t know which history books you have been reading but marrying young and the monarchy was a rather popular combo. Plenty of kings with brides even younger than 9.

                Even now our leading Elites enjoy private Epstein island visits filled with girls not considered legal age.