Sex with a nine year old

Chris

Another example of the 'superior morality' of the 'religion of peace' - reprehensible and vile. But no-one is allowed to say so.

Yilli

I find disturbing that the media in the west like to listen to what Saudi's have to say, but never air the mainstream muslim view. Firstly must understand Saudi's are Wahabi's and are very small minority in the muslim world. Their views are not accepted by majority of the mulsims.When it comes to facts about prophets marriage life please provide evidence and referrences from Kuran to back your accusatios.

Sempronius

Look, I'm not one to give the Religion of Peace an easy ride, but you do have to be careful with this sort of thing.

Have you any idea what the age of consent was in this country 1400 years ago? Surprisingly enough there wasn't one. And young females started producing offspring as soon as they were old enough to do so (and I don't imagine they were virgin births).

Chris

Yilli - surely you're aware that the prophet's marriage life is not alluded to in the Koran - which it is claimed was dictated to him by the angel Gabriel - but in the Hadiths. Perhaps you might ask Dr. Ahmad Al-Mub'i where he gets his ideas from.

I might just add - every time we quote a murderous or hate filled verse from the Koran (and they are there to quote!) we are told 1. It's out of context. or 2. It's a translation from Arabic and therefore can't be truly appreciated or understood by Westerners. We're enjoined to read the Koran, then when we do, are told we can't truly understand it. Hmmmm.....

Sempronius - 'young females started producing offspring as soon as they were old enough to do so' - but as you state yourself - that WAS 1400 years ago.

Rob

Yilli, it is well-known that the Saudis are extremely active in spreading their brand of Islam, and as for providing references regarding the story of Aisha I'm sure Dr. Ahmed would be delighted to enlighten you.
As for Sempronius, I agree you need to be careful, but I believe female puberty 1400 years ago was probably no youunger than 14, and as far as I know, pedophilia was not rampant at that time in this country...I don't see the equivalence

Jennie

In the UK there was no legal age of marriage until 1753 when it was fixed at 14 for boys and 12 for girls, in line with ages of assumed puberty. Not until 1929 was it raised to 16 for both!

So we were a bit late here in guarding against legalised sexual exploitation of adolescents.

Sempronius

In medieval times and before girls were typically married off and started to produce children at around the age of 12.

I think you have to make a distinction between "evil" and "ignorance". 1400 years ago in Arabia as here they presumably had other priorities than working out whether it was really appropriate to let nine year olds have sex or get married. It doesn't mean they were right but it doesn't make Muhammad a paedophile in the way we would understand the term today (even if the Saudi cleric is correct, which I wouldn't necessarily bet on).

I don't count this as "moral equivalence", by the way. These days a cleric (even in Saudi Arabia) who thinks and says that sex with nine year olds is okay is fair game for as much criticism as you choose to throw at him.

I don't think the "paedophile prophet" line that some people like to peddle is fair or useful, though.

David de la Fish

The only reason to make more than passing reference to sexual practices from 1400 years ago is when it is used to legitimise current behaviour.

If literal readers of the Hadith think sex with 9 year-olds is OK on these grounds then I have a problem with that.

If they want to admit that the Koran and Hadith are historical documents that they happen to find inspiring but which require analysis and interpretation before being considered relevant to today thats just fine. Though why anyone thinks they remain particularly important once they have the same status as say Beowulf is beyond me.

The same applies to Christian literalists too of course.

Elie Elhadj

Is Saudi Treatment of Women Islamic?

On March 11, 2002, fire struck a girls’ school in Mecca, Saudi Arabia. The religious police locked the schoolgirls inside the inferno rather than let them escape without their head-to-toe cloak. The firemen were prevented from entering the school for fear that the girls would be seen without their covering. Fourteen young girls were burned to death and dozens more were injured.
Is this treatment Islamic?
To answer this question, a comparison will be made between the fine treatment that the Prophet Muhammad reportedly accorded to His first wife Khadija and the treatment of women that evolved under Sharia (Islamic Law).
We are told that Khadija was the best born, a rich businesswoman who employed Muhammad, proposed marriage to him when He was 25 years of age. She was 15 years his senior and twice a widow. For the 25 years of their marriage, the Prophet remained monogamous. Khadija was the one person to whom He turned for advice. She was the first convert to Islam.
The difference between the Prophet’s treatment of Khadija and the treatment of women under Sharia Law is stark.
The Quran subordinates women to men [Verses 2:228 (Chapter 2, Verse 228], 4:34, and 18:46). It decrees that one man is equal to two women when bearing witness in a legal setting (2:282), that a male’s share in inheritance is equal to that of two females (4:11), that a man can have up to four wives simultaneously, on condition of equitable treatment (4:3), that a husband can divorce his wife without giving reason, though the Prophet reportedly discouraged divorce.
Allowing the Muslim male to marry four wives simultaneously and divorce any one of them without giving cause is synonymous with unlimited polygamy.
Additionally, Shiite religious scholars interpret Verses 4:4 and 4:24 as if men are allowed a temporary marriage contract, called Mut’a, for which a payment to the woman is made for her services for a predetermined period of time.
Sunnis sanction the Misyar marriage. Here, the couple lives apart; the woman relinquishes her right to have financial support and accepts the man’s visits in her family house. Misyar has been sanctioned by the Islamic Jurisprudence Assembly on April 12, 2006 and by the Grand Muftis of Saudi Arabia and Al-Azhar Mosque in Cairo.
Misyar and Mut’a marriages are sanctioned adultery.
The Sunna (sayings and acts attributed to the Prophet) too contains Traditions unflattering to Women. Al-Bukhari attributed to the Prophet saying that most of those who are in hell are women, that women’s lack of intelligence is the reason why a woman’s witness testimony in an Islamic court of law is equal to half that of the Muslim male, and that the reason why Muslim women are prohibited from praying and fasting during menstruation is due to them being deficient in religious belief. Al-Nasai attributed to the Prophet saying: People who entrust the management of their affairs to a woman will fail.
Sharia Law is not applied uniformly in Muslim countries. In Saudi Arabia, Islam is used to eliminate the potential political opposition to the government by one half of the population. There, Sharia means, among others, strict segregation of the sexes at work, schools, hospitals, shops, public parks, elevators, let alone guardianship by the male in the family. In Saudi Arabia, Al-Bukhari’s attributions became a common popular proverb: women are light on brains and religion. A well known Saudi cleric told Lebanese television viewers on June 19, 2008 that it is permissible for girls to get married as young as age one but have the consummation of the marriage postponed until age nine; following the example of the Prophet who took Aisha to be his wife when she was 6, but had sex with her only when she was 9.
By contrast, in Muslim non-Arab Bangladesh, Indonesia, Pakistan, and Turkey, Sharia means that women can be presidents and prime ministers.
In June 2006, Turkey formed a committee of thirty-five scholars to study the removal of Prophetic attributions that encourage violence against women.

Elie Elhadj; Author: The Islamic Shield
http://www.universal-publishers.com/book.php?method=ISBN&book=1599424118
Blog: http://journals.aol.com/eeh100/daring-opinion/