Poor Aisha

[Tiassa]

As compared to what?

DJ Supreme

Re: Khomeni

This response of yours is inadequate to convey any particular point. Did it have one?

Re: "Untitled"

Uncountable abominations and evils have been commited in the name of Allah; mohammed and Islam. Most of it with the written blessing of the "holy scriptures" of this religion.

I'll save the excoriation of your unaccountably low position and merely ask you how the Koran is unique from any major holy text in this sense?

And since you can't do that--believe me, I know this in advance--perhaps you'd like to take a whack at other vaunted ideas in society: Capitalism, Communism, Democracy ....

Thats why I dislike Islam. Thats why I protest against the pseudo-humanistic and tolerant crap (tolerate islam blah blah blah) we're fed here.

Well, so long as you admit it. But people aren't kindly disposed to those who use their ignorance as a license to hate.

You can insist on ignorance. I have no obligation to respect you for it.

:m:,
Tiassa

 

[Mrs.Lucysnow]

Hello Flores,

I do not know whether the prophet in fact had sexual relations with a nine year old, I was responding to this comment by Okinrus: "Aisha wanted Muhammed and gave him full consent. So first explain why this wrong in your moral system?"

His comment implied that if Muhammed did indeed sleep with a Aisha that it is okay because the nine year old had given consent. Okinrus asked why this is wrong in someones moral system. My comments were derived from his response. If the Muhammed did indeed have a sexual relationship with a nine year old then he is a "dirty ole man" prophet or no prophet. My response to his comment was completely visceral...my deepest gut reaction, a sense of outrage rising from the solar plexus. If the facts are correct (hypothetically) then it is only another example of how people would put up with anything from a religious leader because he has a mandate from God, behaviour I find insupportable.

Tiassa you wrote: But the larger context also involves the fact that we're hacking Mohammed here for something that ... well? Most men, insofar as I can tell, would envy Mohammed

Tiassa you need to meet a better variety of men if you the ones you know would ENVY Mohammed for having a nine year old wife! Is this really what you believe men fancy? Pre-pubescent females? Lusting after a 16 or 17 year old is not the same as lusting after a 6 or 10 year old. Sorry but the men I know would have no part in that. Looking like a 12 year old and being 12 is not the same thing Tiassa! Tiassa why would you expect your daughter to be sexually active at the age of 11? I have no children, but if I had a daughter I certainly would not be preparing her for contraceptives before she was menstruating. I don't hate Islam or any other religion, actually I have absolutely no use for religion at all! This is not about Islam. Jesus can kiss my ass with his self-righteous suicide and the Buddha is of no use unless he is willing to sit down and have a beer with me (and he did once ) . My post was directed to someone who used the word consent to justify a marriage to a six year old child. You say Mohammed married a young woman, well if she was six she was not a young woman.

You wrote: So Mohammed had a young lover. This is bad. Compared to what? Compared to the thousands of rapes annually in high school and college social circles in America? Compared to how many girls did I know who were abused? Compared to a nation that made Britney Spears number one? How's this one: Jon Benet Ramsey? Why do we have child beauty contestants?

Yes Tiassa this is comparable to rape and those other girls who were abused. And no it is not comparable to child beauty pagents and Britney Spears being number one it is worse.
Would you go so far as to say that if he had married her at five and waited for coitus by putting his holy scepter in her mouth that this too is okay because he is a prophet and only human after all? Hell Tiassa I know Satanist who would draw the line somewhere. I will take a look at the paper you suggested.

 

[Mrs.Lucysnow]

Okay Tiassa I read the paper but I do not think I understand your point exactly. What does homosexuality or sado-masochism (I am neither homosexual and don't get off on spanking but find neither abhorrent) have to do with pedophilia? The first two activities are not the same as the last since the last necessitates preying on someone who does not understand their own sexuality. It is the adult preying on innocence, which is exactly what the prophet would have been doing if he indeed had sex with a nine year old.

 

[Tiassa]

Love hate love, or "I couldn't think of a title"

Lucysnow

Tiassa you need to meet a better variety of men

Human beings are enough for me. I don't go for the superhuman type.

Pre-pubescent females?

It's part of American history, too.

Sorry but the men I know would have no part in that.

First off, I'd say you're overestimating the overtness of this lust, and secondly, I'd say you're underestimating its power.

Looking like a 12 year old and being 12 is not the same thing Tiassa!

But what about lusting after that appearance? Isn't that the question? Or are we making Aisha the focus of our condemnation here for apparently being beautiful, as beside the point as that should be?

Tiassa why would you expect your daughter to be sexually active at the age of 11?

It's a rough prediction. In fact, a note of comfort on that side is a recent study which showed girls are waiting longer. The descent from my mother's generation to mine--according to parental lectures--in the public paranoia of girls giving away their virtue dropped from 17 to 14. Time magazine ran an article a couple years ago on the maturity rate of young girls, and I could not believe some of the twelve year-olds they were talking to. And you know those unfortunate "Springer" girls? ("Help! My daughter dresses like a tramp!") I wouldn't know some of them were 11 or 12.

I have no children, but if I had a daughter I certainly would not be preparing her for contraceptives before she was menstruating.

I'll be happy if she's not menstruating at age 11. There is a reasonable probability, however, especially in this age of having growth hormones in various foods and dietary supplements. The trick is to not be so paranoid as to warp the child with obsession over her sexuality while not being so inattentive that I'm saying, "How did this happen?" when she has an abortion at 14.

I don't hate Islam or any other religion, actually I have absolutely no use for religion at all!

I just want to make sure I'm clear on this point:

- You don't hate Islam, and have no use for religion at all, but you do have use for contributing to an ill-intended hate-propaganda thread?

This is not about Islam.

I'm happy to read those words, but I would also ask that you look around at this topic and its intentions. Or did you skip the topic post?

The question arise: Did Mohammed just create Islam to get power and sex? I certainly get that feeling. (DJSupreme23)

At any rate ... did it occur to you that you were supporting an ugly, vicious, and hate-inspired bandwagon, or are such consequences of your actions beyond your concern?

Jesus can kiss my ass with his self-righteous suicide

So while you don't hate Islam or any other religion, you're just really really really mad with one megalomaniac because of the poor choices of billions of people who have raised his name to deity?

Buddha is of no use unless he is willing to sit down and have a beer with me.

While I understand the sentiment ....

"Me! Me! Me!" Can the audience suggest a new refrain?

My post was directed to someone who used the word consent to justify a marriage to a six year old child.

I find that a little amusing in its own right, the notion of consent and a six year old girl. I don't pretend that women have really had much authority of consent until recent years. If I'm not mistaken, it was during my lifetime that the wife officially ceased being the property of the husband somewhere in the British Empire. I'm looking around for that reference. The point being that consent is a funny issue in any context beyond the last century.

You say Mohammed married a young woman, well if she was six she was not a young woman.

I'll be honest ... I see "lover" and "wife" ... if I wrote "young woman" somewhere, please point out the sentence and I'll happily change it to one of the other terms I've used.

Yes Tiassa this is comparable to rape and those other girls who were abused. And no it is not comparable to child beauty pagents and Britney Spears being number one it is worse

I think you're missing the point on that count.

I'm an American. I live in a culture that worships lustful youth. I live in a culture that obsesses over youthful sexuality. It's not so much that the Christian censorship advocates are all wrong in what they complain about with TV and movies. Some of it is dead on the mark. But you can't staple people's mouths shut, tape over their eyes, plug their ears for them. But it wouldn't be so ironic if the people who worried so much about how much sex is presented to the American public weren't also obsessing that much of their lives away thinking about other people and sex, about children and sex. Let's face it: the anti-sexualists in America think about sex a lot more than most, and that's a pretty stunning thought when you pause to consider it.

Would you go so far as to say that if he had married her at five and waited for coitus by putting his holy scepter in her mouth that this too is okay because he is a prophet and only human after all?

It's stupidity like this that moves me to rudeness.

(1) No.
(2) What did his being the Prophet of Islam have to do with our discussion here? You're the one who says this isn't about Islam for you. How would being The Prophet change the rightness or wrongness of having sex with a nine year-old girl?
(3) "Only human after all" - you so don't understand what you're talking about at this point.

Hell Tiassa I know Satanist who would draw the line somewhere.

True. So do I. That and a buck still doesn't mean you have a point, and I'm starting to doubt that you have a clue. For instance, you go on to note:

What does homosexuality or sado-masochism (I am neither homosexual and don't get off on spanking but find neither abhorrent) have to do with pedophilia?

This tells me that (A) you weren't paying attention, or (B) you suffer reading comprehension difficulties.

You're asking the wrong questions. That question has nothing to do with this topic.

The first two activities are not the same as the last since the last necessitates preying on someone who does not understand their own sexuality.

I'm happy you can make this distinction. You'd be surprised at how many people are opinionated about sexuality who can't figure that out.

It is the adult preying on innocence, which is exactly what the prophet would have been doing if he indeed had sex with a nine year old.

Now ... you see, I actually agree with you.

But that's a modern value.

I still think it was problematic and damaging in the Prophet's time, but I see no indication that anyone here has done nearly enough research to speak to Aisha's state of mind aside from the few scant lines provided in the topic post which were taken from an anti-Islamic website. Start here; it is essentially the topic post. If you click the Back link at the bottom of the page, it takes you here. And if you follow the Home link at the bottom of that page, you arrive at Anti-Jihad International.

Perhaps we could see some reasonable scholarship on the subject?

Just maybe?

I mean, come on ... propaganda from an organization dedicated to fighting "against Muhammedan (Islamic) imperialism in all its forms"?

Look at it from an atheistic perspective: Mohammed is already hallucinating religious visions ... what ... does Aisha surprise you?

Look at it in an historical context: Sure, I can say it's wrong. But what the hell am I supposed to think of my own society today, which pretty much victimizes children in the name of its own entertainment? Nobody yet has put the Aisha factor into any context that compels me to find it particularly significant.

Seriously, Lucysnow ... watch how people sometimes come to think I vilify innocuous things.

And then pause to think about the question: What the hell am I supposed to think of my own society today, which pretty much victimizes children in the name of its own entertainment?

Sure, it's wrong, but the world is a sea of wrongness, and in the grand scheme of things, I'm hoping someone can give me better relevance than a reference to Khomeni.

Notice earlier in the topic when I pointed out to DJ Supreme, what nobody can explain to me is what the big deal is about Mohammed and Aisha.

The response, you'll note, was a failure: A question to mark the dodge, and then a broad, unsupported (and insupportable perhaps) generalization.

What can I tell you? It's just not important enough to me to hold this kind of crap against Muslims of the modern day. I've been through this sort of accusatory process with another great monotheism - Christianity. It's easy enough to do, and it's easy enough to deceive yourself into thinking that this kind of an issue is significant in the present. This is the kind of topic that is started by a poster who is determined to have a problem with a group of people but isn't smart enough to go out and build a valid case.

And personally, Lucysnow, I do believe that this isn't about Islamophobia (why is it -ophobia and not -iphobia?) for you. I think you may be carrying out an argument for a different day.

Because any day I agree with you about the wrongness of sex with a nine year-old. True, I've never lived in a cave for an extended period of time, but still ....

But this isn't just about Aisha. It's about Aisha, 1,400+ years of world history, and the determination of certain people to find a justification for the irrational degree of fear toward Islam they suffer. I can't believe how frightened people are of an Islam they've invented. On the one hand, they make it larger than it is. To the other, they fear the scale of it. And the "detail". But that detail is as much empty space as a bag of cheese puffs. But that's what happens when things are artificially inflated. Especially when the significance of an event or idea is artificially inflated.

Why don't we just point to the terrorist from the 1993 WTC bombing (remember that one?) who went back to the van rental center to collect his deposit after blowing up the van and talk about how stupid Muslims are?

Like I said ... cheese puffs.

:m:,
Tiassa

 

[okinrus]

If the Muhammed did indeed have a sexual relationship with a nine year old then he is a "dirty ole man" prophet or no prophet. My response to his comment was completely visceral...my deepest gut reaction, a sense of outrage rising from the solar plexus. If the facts are correct (hypothetically) then it is only another example of how people would put up with anything from a religious leader because he has a mandate from God, behaviour I find insupportable.

Yes a true prophet of God would never engage in those type of behaviors. I know that there is a case in the bible where God makes Hosea marry a prostitute, but everything that God does usually has a meaning. I'd be suprised if someone can give an explaination other than lust in this case.

What about these verses in Quran "The clans"
33.36] And it behoves not a believing man and a believing woman that they should have any choice in their matter when Allah and His Apostle have decided a matter; and whoever disobeys Allah and His Apostle, he surely strays off a manifest straying.
[33.37] And when you said to him to whom Allah had shown favor and to whom you had shown a favor: Keep your wife to yourself and be careful of (your duty to) Allah; and you concealed in your soul what Allah would bring to light, and you feared men, and Allah had a greater right that you should fear Him. But when Zaid had accomplished his want of her, We gave her to you as a wife, so that there should be no difficulty for the believers in respect of the wives of their adopted sons, when they have accomplished their want of them; and Allah's command shall be performed.
[33.38] There is no harm in the Prophet doing that which Allah has ordained for him; such has been the course of Allah with respect to those who have gone before; and the command of Allah is a decree that is made absolute:
[33.39] Those who deliver the messages of Allah and fear Him, and do not fear any one but Allah; and Allah is sufficient to take account.

We see similar behavior practiced by modern so called false prophets such as David Koresh.

 

[Mrs.Lucysnow]

If you noticed Tiassa my post was directed to one person and the one comment he had made. I have not commented on the validity of the text, what the said story has to say about Islam, I did not comment on all the dribble showing religious quotations or ANY of that. It is you who decided to enter into an argument with my opinion based on some religious argument or debate about sexual proclivities, historical precedence and cultural trends. Now I have absolutely no comment regarding America's obsession with youth. Looks to me that the new 'trend' is towards older women (Demi Moore and her young Kushner, Julianne Moore and her 15 year old younger husband). Squashbuckler on sciforums is 20 and his girlfriend is 48. A drop-dead gorgeous guy I was strung-out on has a 42 year old girlfriend and he is 28. So I don't see too many men running around looking for pre-pubescent females....sorry! The media projecting images of youth, waifs, blonds in tight clothing and all that nonsense does not create pedophiles or their behaviour. The media projecting such images only places the burden on adults to become more 'youthful', not prey on children. As for the "jerry springer girls" that is another issue entirely, having to do with lack of parenting and the young finding sex as the only avenue of self-worth (it would be interesting to do a study on how many of those girls were sexually abused themselves). You wrote about puritanism and acknowledging sex with ones children fine. I am sorry you were raised with sexually repressed parents and now are waiting in anticipation for your girl-child to begin bearing all at 11. As for Jesus I am not 'mad' at the decomposed corpse or that others choose to diefy him, I simply have no reverence for the myth of Jesus any more than I do for Odin, having him "kiss my ass" is just my way of stating that fact. I do not diefy anything not the dollar bill, neither my lover or parents, idols or myths. I think god is everything everywhere impersonal and unknowable. If I had not come across Okinrus comment I would not have added a post...actually I did not even bother to read the long winded responses that were added concerning the minutiae over the historical text. I simply was challenging Okinrus presumption of CONSENT and his defense of marrying a six year old. He asked the question: "Why is this wrong in your moral system?" Well I have very few "morals" as such but I do have a strong opinion about 52year old pervs justifying coitus with nine year olds. The fact that there are those who would bash Islam, christianity, Judiasm, Paganism doesn't surprise me. For me there is no SACRILEGE when it comes to pointing facts on or making fun of religion. That some of the religious lack a sense of humor or irony is proof of their paltry BELIEFS. But hey why not attack religion? Capitalism, socialism and every other ism gets its tail whipped (usually for good reason) so why shouldn't the same happen to religion? As far as I am concerned there is no use for a prophet. If the marvel of BEING doesn't resonate of God, if all of nature doesn't then I don't know what would...certainly not words scribbled on ancient parchment or some self-proclaimed prophet. The fact that pre-pubescent females is a part of American history also isn't an issue here, as I stated earlier my only position is that a six year old is in no position now, tomorrow, or a thousand years ago to consent to a sexual relationship with an adult. You want to debate that fact with me then fine, but as you stated you agree with that point. Now go back and look at my post and sift out where you have found hints towards all the other nonsense you have pulled out of your hat? Or is it that you just enjoy writing long posts about everything and nothing?

You wrote: First off, I'd say you're overestimating the overtness of this lust, and secondly, I'd say you're underestimating its power.

Am I really? How do you keep your hands off of children is beyond me. The men I know like titts and ass, hips and sexual provocation, not underdeveloped body parts. They are all down with the Halle Berry and Pamela Anderson action not Shirley Temple.

You wrote: But what about lusting after that appearance? Isn't that the question? Or are we making Aisha the focus of our condemnation here for apparently being beautiful, as beside the point as that should be?

Lusting after appearance is not the same as having sex with a six or nine year old. Admiring beauty in its various forms whether it be a gorgeous five year old (and I have seen them) or 13 year old is not the same as lusting their person, their body. Or do you assume that when a man notices the beauty of a five year old his dick hardens automatically? How the hell should I know if Aisha was beautiful or not there were no pics added to the post. Whether a six year old is beautiful or not has absolutely nothing to do with my point. Handling a sexually underdeveloped male or female makes the handler a dirtly old man in my book...be he the messiah, prophet or joe blow from down the block. And since pacifism doesn't appeal to me I would suggest cutting off their hands, scrotum and penis as punishment. This way they can just "admire" youthful beauty with their eyes. Any questions?

Okinrus: How could a god, any god, respect a bunch of spineless sheep who have been endowed with volition when they will obey any idiotic suggestion he puts on the table? If god...any god...asked me to do something, anything that I personally believed to be wrong or counterproductive I would tell him or her or it to do it themselves and leave me alone (pulls down pants and displays a very pretty ass for said god to admire). Isn't this god we are talking about here? Isn't this god omnipotent? Why the hell would he need anyone to kill their first born or force an old wrinkled cock into a childs orifice (if the story be true)? Never mind marrying a prostitute (probably one of his better suggestions). A god could only have contempt for the simpering fools who would do whatever it dictated when they have been endowed with fee will and a conscience to boot. Ahh geez now you religious folk have me using a mythological illusion again to make a point. Pass the haldol please:bugeye:

 

[Mrs.Lucysnow]

Tiassa wrote: "Me! Me! Me!" Can the audience suggest a new refrain?

Yes Tiassa, ME. *begins singing*

"Jesus loves ME how I know, cause the bible tells ME so.
Yeeeessss Jesus loves ME, Yeeesss Jesus loves ME, Yeessss Jesus loves MEEEEE, the bible tells ME so."

We all now bow our heads in reverence.

 

[Flores]

Originally posted by Lucysnow
Hello Flores,

I do not know whether the prophet in fact had sexual relations with a nine year old, I was responding to this comment by Okinrus: "Aisha wanted Muhammed and gave him full consent. So first explain why this wrong in your moral system?"

His comment implied that if Muhammed did indeed sleep with a Aisha that it is okay because the nine year old had given consent. Okinrus asked why this is wrong in someones moral system. My comments were derived from his response. If the Muhammed did indeed have a sexual relationship with a nine year old then he is a "dirty ole man" prophet or no prophet. My response to his comment was completely visceral...my deepest gut reaction, a sense of outrage rising from the solar plexus. If the facts are correct (hypothetically) then it is only another example of how people would put up with anything from a religious leader because he has a mandate from God, behaviour I find insupportable.

As a purely moral question without passing a judgement on a historical figure that can't come back and defend itself, I say.
A 50 year old sleeping with a nine year old is morally wrong under today's culture practices. For example, we know that it's morally wrong for a brother and sister to have sex, yet we must accept the fact that Adam and Eve's kids had to marry each other for the sake of continuation of the humanity Gene. Now, the question is how do moral codes develop, and the answer is slowly and in stages. We never wake up from endorsing slavery in every house to abolishing in every house and making it a crime over night. Same for how sex evolved and the status of women evolved. Stages of allowing the marriage of slaves to freeing these slaves as wifes, to perhaps marrying their daughter to fee them were just the logical next step to today's freedom.

You really have to look at the past as past, and try to understand it's context within the past circumstances. It is historically documented that the birth of a girl was considered a scandel during those times. Newly born girls were buried alive and that was acceptable practice....Completely acceptable that the father used to obtain public help in burying the little girl. When Islam came during this dark ignorant age, it had many problems awaiting it. Women rights were down the toilet, slavery was the worst in history, moral codes were non existent. How does god cleanse such filth while giving credit to human accomplishment. It happens in stages. First, killing little girls was prohibited, the death penality was installed for any person that would kill another soul, then marriage for these girls was prescribed, afterall, a girl during these times had no career future beside marriage. A prophet marrying a nine year old and calling her later the mother of all muslims have elevated the status of the women greatly. Aisha used to debate just like you Lucy at a young age and win debates againest established men. Noone dared disrespect her, she earned her status in a dumb backward society with her marriage to the prophet. Prophet Muhammed also married a chrisitan woman and jewish woman and made them keep their religion to show the world that Islam doesn't differenciate between religions. Later on people interpreted this that muslim men can marry non muslim women without forcing them to convert, while the muslim women can't, which is not true, but can you imagine if the Prophet never married any woman but muslim, you would have a bunch of muslim men forcing their foriegn wives to convert.

As far as your discussion regarding out obsession with the youth, so I'd like you to know that Prophet Muhammed was 25 when he married the love of his life Khadija at the age of 40. She was an established business woman looking for an honest partner to help her in the zoo of arabia. Prophet Muhammed stayed faithfull to khadija until he was 45 and she died at the age of 60. If Muhammed was indeed the sex maniac you guys describe, wouldn't he have selected a young wife and cheated on her or married on her many during her life.

 

[Tiassa]

A note before the carnage

Lucysnow

Note: As one of my criticisms of Bush was that he spoke when angry after 9/11 and squandered a good deal of the political credibility earned by the blood of over 3,000 innocent victims, I took the opportunity provided by a short-term outage at Sciforums last night to "sleep on it" in order to make sure I wasn't merely firing off while angry. And then I remembered who it was I was addressing, and my concerns almost evaporated. And then I read Flores' note and, well, so much for the line about "burying a bad topic". It's not buried yet. That would have been embarrassing, tellyawhat.

A Message to Lucysnow, or, "Would you kindly remove the cork?"

If you noticed Tiassa my post was directed to one person and the one comment he had made.

And if you noticed, my initial post to you in this topic addressed that very point.

The rest of our discussion is as much your choice as it is mine.

I have not commented on the validity of the text

It's starting to puzzle me why you bothered commenting at all.

What, someone gave you an opening, so you decided to add your voice to a nonsensical debate?

It is you who decided to enter into an argument with my opinion based on some religious argument or debate about sexual proclivities, historical precedence and cultural trends.

Hey, some of us like to stick somewhere close to the topic. I guess I'm a tyrant for presuming you to be so decent as to be relevant to the topic.

Now I have absolutely no comment regarding America's obsession with youth.

Avoiding the subject is your choice.

So you think Mohammed was a dirty old man. Tell me ... why is it important enough for you to comment on at all? I'm legitimately interested.

After all, you have no interest in the actual topic. You have no interest in the depth and breadth of dirtiness about humanity. What, exactly, is your point in this topic?

Looks to me that the new 'trend' is towards older women (Demi Moore and her young Kushner, Julianne Moore and her 15 year old younger husband).

Okay. But only because you say so.

So I don't see too many men running around looking for pre-pubescent females....sorry!

Compared against a sample of one, I'm not surprised.

The media projecting images of youth, waifs, blonds in tight clothing and all that nonsense does not create pedophiles or their behaviour.

There's a diversion if I ever saw it. I'll let you sit and think about what's wrong with that point.

(Hint: It's irrelevant.)

The media projecting such images only places the burden on adults to become more 'youthful', not prey on children.

Mmm-hmm. I suppose the 42 year-old girlfriend suddenly looks like the waif in the CK underwear ads ....

As for the "jerry springer girls" that is another issue entirely, having to do with lack of parenting and the young finding sex as the only avenue of self-worth (it would be interesting to do a study on how many of those girls were sexually abused themselves).

(1) You missed part of the point. Has it occurred to you that good-old American non-Muslim adults find them sexy? I know, it's trippy. But someone obviously does, or else there would be no blending of the virgin and the whore.
(2) That study on sexual abuse would tend to drive home a point. Incidentally, 10 years ago the poster went around the University of Oregon noting that "1 in 4 women in your life will be raped in their lifetime. Will it be your sister? Your mother? Your wife? Your daughter?" Ten years later I tally up the damage on the field and I'm way over my quota. I was over my quota by my senior year of Catholic high school. Guess what? I want a fucking break from it, too. But it's not happening, and I'm not in Iran at the moment.

As for Jesus I am not 'mad' at the decomposed corpse or that others choose to diefy him, I simply have no reverence for the myth of Jesus any more than I do for Odin, having him "kiss my ass" is just my way of stating that fact.

Pretty tough for a corpse to kiss your ass. Nonetheless, the disrespect is dripping from you. Would you like a towel, or are you happy enough staining the carpet?

I do not diefy anything not the dollar bill, neither my lover or parents, idols or myths.

I believe that. Except for the word "anything". The short list is easy enough to believe for the most part. "Myths" get a different treatment, as I know most people like to limit their idea of "myth" to very simple faery tales. Few people are aware of the myths of State, or Marriage, or Property, or Rights.

If I had not come across Okinrus comment I would not have added a post

Did you notice something going around this discussion? The number of people who, while they find sex with children wrong, are unwilling to definitively assert a modern value judgment over such a petty point presented in poor intent with no link to anything relevant or vital? I thought, at first, that Okinrus was being sarcastic. He has a point, whether I like it or not. Perhaps Aisha would have starved. Does that change anything? Well, for me, the answer is either "No, not really," or, "I can't say since I've never been a six year-old girl facing the possibility of starving to death.

actually I did not even bother to read the long winded responses that were added concerning the minutiae over the historical text

That actually explains a lot.

"Why is this wrong in your moral system?"

I'm as interested to hear your objective answer to the question as you were to hear Okinrus'. I admit he surprised me ... I didn't expect him to pull out the card about not being able to say why something is wrong. And with that, as well, he has a point.

Well I have very few "morals" as such but I do have a strong opinion about 52year old pervs justifying coitus with nine year olds

You'll probably find that in the abstract, we're not that far apart on such a point. And yes, it is merely an opinion.

I have to admit that on the one hand, I'm kind of sorry to have wasted your time. It hadn't occurred to me that you were carrying on a conversation that had nothing to do with the topic and that belonged in a different forum. In the words of Carl the Alien: "Moo ... moo-moo." ("Whoops! My bad!")

But hey why not attack religion?

The only real reason I can think of comes when you're not smart enough to pull it off.

Capitalism, socialism and every other ism gets its tail whipped (usually for good reason) so why shouldn't the same happen to religion?

What an interesting question. I'm curious why you ask it.

However, in order to give you any sort of substantive response, I must presume to a certain degree the meaning of the question.

In general, I would say your question is beside the point insofar as our discussion is concerned. You show anger; this may be clouding your perception.

I have no objections to criticisms of religion. However if anyone expects that criticism to be respected, it ought to have a foundation, a purpose, and be something a little more than bashing because one feels somehow justified in this particular hatred.

The fact that pre-pubescent females is a part of American history also isn't an issue here, as I stated earlier my only position is that a six year old is in no position now, tomorrow, or a thousand years ago to consent to a sexual relationship with an adult.

I noticed you flee the comparative. In trying to determine what the actual point of this topic is, one needs to examine the assertion. The assertion is not particularly unique in its address of Islam compared to other religions. Nobody has connected the dots in such a way as to make Aisha significant in the manner intended by the topic post. People, such as yourself, sometimes tend to keep the issue isolated, as if it exists in a vacuum. The horror, the shock, the depravity ... now the critics lay that all on Islam. In reality ... the horror, the shock, the depravity, and frankly I would appreciate it if you could tell me why Aisha should matter any more than any other of the billions of sexual improprieties which have plagued women and children since time immemorial? If you can tell me why, in the present, it should matter as much as the daily abuses going on, say, at the hands of the pseudo-Christian "Lord's Resistance Army", and who cares what religion someone is? Isn't the abuse itself the important thing?

You want to debate that fact with me then fine, but as you stated you agree with that point.

Yes, Lucysnow, I'm God.

And what I mean by that is that since I can't figure out what makes it right, that obviously seals the deal. Look--it's not just this issue, but that in general I'm aware that I'm not God, and I would prefer it if you would not ask me to be God just so that I can agree with you.

Besides, if I was God, I could easily just flick you out of the way and shut you up. But that would simply be a method of dealing with a mistake that, were I God, I wouldn't have made in the first place.

I'm not Mohammed. I'm not anyone who has lived prior to 1973. You want to debate that fact with me, fine.

I'm not God. You want to debate that fact with me, and I'll have to smoke more pot.

My modern value judgments are ignorant of the factors of consideration which presented themselves to Mohammed. If you wish to debate that fact, well, I would recommend seeking help.

Now go back and look at my post and sift out where you have found hints towards all the other nonsense you have pulled out of your hat? Or is it that you just enjoy writing long posts about everything and nothing?

Nope. I'm dumb enough to presume you smart enough to understand. Call it an irrational faith in human beings.

Am I really?

Yes. It's apparent in your snooty counterpoint. "Well, the men in my life don't do that ...."

Whatever.

Do you pretend to know the men in your life that well? How many of them, suffering pedophilic lust, would come to you and say, "You know, I really want to f@ck a kid"?

How do you keep your hands off of children is beyond me.

Would you like me to refer you to psychological counseling, then, or to the police? Because frankly, if you can't figure out how to keep your hands off children, there's a problem.

Wait, wait, wait ... I'm out of line. Obviously, you are in need of help. While I don't have as much experience working with people from "your end of the equation" ... nonetheless, how can I help?

I'm sorry. I should have realized this before. (Again: Moo ... moo-moo.)

They are all down with the Halle Berry and Pamela Anderson action not Shirley Temple.

I have to admit that this is really for a different discussion, as it's a separate issue entirely, but how do you tolerate such men? Seriously ... I never figured out what the attraction was to "unreal" women like Pamela Anderson. Anyway, it's a separate topic.

One ... two ... three ... oh, wait ... my high school ... ninety-five ... ninety-six ... I guess after you get used to knowing sex offenders in all walks of life (I'd guess I've known about a hundred in my day) and realizing that in America one of the big differences between your average date rapist and your best friend who merely jokes about knocking her down and giving her a good shag 'cuz she needs it is that little ....

The studies aren't kidding. Men think about sex almost constantly.

Nobody thinks the men in their life are those kind of men.

Lusting after appearance is not the same as having sex with a six or nine year old

Theoretically, I do disagree with Christ on this point, so you'll find we nearly agree. But more to the point ... if an adult needs to have a vision of inappropriate youth in front of him--to imagine a child--we can certainly be thankful it's not actually a child, but are you telling me it's healthy to lust the appearance of a child? I'm not entirely sure it is. Pornography and sex culture don't create predators, but they don't do anything to solve the problem.

Or do you assume that when a man notices the beauty of a five year old his dick hardens automatically?

I don't have survey data on that. Sorry to disappoint you.

How the hell should I know if Aisha was beautiful or not there were no pics added to the post

Why the hell should I care? However, it appears that Mohammed found her beautiful, and that seems to be a little more applicable to the point. Focus ... focus.

Whether a six year old is beautiful or not has absolutely nothing to do with my point.

I'll be so relieved when you finally get the stick out and tell us what the point is, and what it has to do with this topic.

Handling a sexually underdeveloped male or female makes the handler a dirtly old man in my book

And you have every right to that opinion, even on those occasions when you have to presume the details, presume the considerations, presume the ethical basis, and presume the states of mind of those involved. Seriously--that's not sarcastic.

And since pacifism doesn't appeal to me I would suggest cutting off their hands, scrotum and penis as punishment.

Now you're definitely in the wrong forum. Self-mutilation ... try Free Thoughts, or maybe Art & Culture.

Any questions?

Yes ... A point or a clue ... which do you intend to get first, Lucysnow?

As to the new refrain ... I'll leave it to you to be that predictable. My stars ... you can make a joke at the angry-sixth-grade level. Would you like a gold star?

Lucysnow, I admit you've confused me. If you could let me know what you intend your point to be when you get around to having one, I would consider myself in at least some small debt to you.

:m:,
Tiassa

 

[Mrs.Lucysnow]

Hello Flores.
You wrote: As a purely moral question without passing a judgement on a historical figure that can't come back and defend itself, I say.A 50 year old sleeping with a nine year old is morally wrong under today's culture practices. For example, we know that it's morally wrong for a brother and sister to have sex, yet we must accept the fact that Adam and Eve's kids had to marry each other for the sake of continuation of the humanity Gene. .

Well I disagree with you here Flores. First I don't believe the mythological tale of the garden of Eden, Eve, Adam, Satan, fruit etc. I look at the story as a 'tale' with a spiritual reference. Not as the beginning of humanity. I understand that the bible as well as other religious texts contain historical information but it is also shrouded with myth. I don't need any man or woman to intercede between myself and god so I have no need for a messiah or even a prophet. I also do not rely on society or religious doctrine to determine my morality. As for the prophet I stand by my opinion, IF he had sexual relations with a physically undeveloped nine year old child then he is indeed a perv, a dirty ole man, a wanker. Why would i say this? Because the body of a nine year old female cannot concieve children, cannot enjoy sex, it is basically eating the fruit before it has begun to ripen. So if he did have sexual relations with a child it could only be for his own enjoyment. The fact that he is a historical figure does not absolve him from judgement IF the story is true. I am not stating an opinion about the marriage only the sexual relationship.

You wrote: Now, the question is how do moral codes develop, and the answer is slowly and in stages. We never wake up from endorsing slavery in every house to abolishing in every house and making it a crime over night. Same for how sex evolved and the status of women evolved. Stages of allowing the marriage of slaves to freeing these slaves as wifes, to perhaps marrying their daughter to fee them were just the logical next step to today's freedom

Even in the midst of the transatlantic slave trade there were free white men who were against it and spoke out openly against slavery based on their own moral principle. They did not sit around and wait for the collective moral stance to evolve. As long as we expect society to carry the burden and determine our morality we absolve ourselves from utilizing our intelligence and heart to determine what is right and wrong. Just because this was the case in the prophets time does not mean that I should somehow look towards the incident (IF it happened) and view it from a relative position.
You would have to explain what you mean about how sex evolved. One need only look at the ancient art work on Tantra practises and the Kama Sutra to see that the art of sex and pleasure were quite advanced. As far as women, well if you study the history of human sexuality and marriage through ancient and primitive cultures, you will find that communal sex and polygamy predominate. Communal sex tends to predominate in matriarchal societies—that is, societies in which power tends to pass through women, and property is more or less communal—where women mate with whomever they want, without any particular, or lasting, emotional attachment. An example of this would be the Na a chinese minority living on the Chinese Himalayan foothills. Of course none of them were occidental (lucky devils )

What I don't understand is why there is a need to defend the prophet. Does the entire bases of the muslim religion depend on the prophet? If the prophet were somehow discredited would the whole of Islam fall apart from a lack of foundation? If he did do it why would anyone feel the need to defend or apologize for him?

Really I am not trying to bash the prophet, he is not nearly as annoying as christ hanging from a cross asking god(his father,himself) "why have you forsaken me?" No wonder Rabbi Silver is so disgusted

I do have a question: If the men did not deem it necessary for their wives to convert then why was Islam extended through the sword? Either tribes had to convert or die. I don't have the facts on this actually it is what I have been told, I have also been told (from a muslim) that africans were slaves until there was one exceptional slave who showed such devotion that he and all like him were freed. Can you please give the facts on these two points.

Finally Flores sometimes the religious have to take me with a grain of salt. As you know I use humor, irony and even profanity at times to get my point across. If I have caused you insult or distress by my words concerning the prophet it was certainly not intended for that. I have to endure the ultra-orthodox who refuse to eat in my home because I don't adhere to kashrut law. Jehova's Witnesses banging on my door presenting some elders views like indoctrinated zombies, acts by muslim extremists have turned my dear city into a police state, the evangelists annoying absolutely everyone with their hateful proclamations of fire and brimstone and catholics pretending they still have a viable religion. So I am rebelling I guess against a world of mad believers

 

[Flores]

Originally posted by Lucysnow
I don't need any man or woman to intercede between myself and god so I have no need for a messiah or even a prophet. I also do not rely on society or religious doctrine to determine my morality.

Then you setteled it quickly, and your ideology regarding religion makes you my soul sister. All the other crap about how the biblical or Quranic story exactly happen or which prophet slept with which serpant are myth and semantics not worthy of discussion

 

[Tiassa]

Flores

Flores

It is interesting that there has been little discussion of Khadija, and as I'm one of the chief voices in the obsession with youth debate, I thought perhaps I'd offer you this notion:

- There are a number of separate issues people are trying to roll together in one. Even if we have no debate about Aisha's age (God only knows, the Abramic enterprise has always been exactly precise with numbers ...?) and accept that Mohammed found what we consider inappropriate beauty in a child, well ... first off there is the general issue of context, and you'll note that this doesn't occur to the anti-Islamic crowd unless someone here has objective knowledge of child molesting and is willing to stand up and explain things to them. So how to establish context?

- My biggest concern is the assignation of a modern value judgment toward circumstances which escape modern experience. Perhaps the most visceral revulsion I've ever felt came at a moment when a rape survivor actually wept in apology on my shoulder because she wasn't a virgin when she gave herself to me. And then I start surveying the damage on the battlefield and here's what I can't figure out about sex crime survivors: A huge portion of the internal psychological damage done by sexual abuse seems to be responsive to social prejudices. Had Aisha a living parent to look to, were she to say, "Mommy, he tried to do this to me," would that parent beat her and shout, "Wicked child! Wicked child! Tell not such lies of your good fortune!"

One day ... I forget what I was saying about what, but I was complaining, and a rape survivor looked me square in the eye and said, "Shut up. If you love me we have more important things to think about, please." The message was clear: my problems were, truly, insignificant compared to those plaguing the sometimes-suicidal young woman sitting beside me. On the other hand, she gave me no shit when I wept for Stevie Ray Vaughan. She also lifted me by the same devices from the self-loathing that comes with certain recognitions of one's own sins. And time teaches me that this is because our concerns were relative and temporary. I cannot estimate how much more or less psychological damage would have occurred if we didn't exist in a particularly exemplary segment of our generation's obsession with sexuality.

So for me, looking back nearly fourteen centuries to a time that I barely understand, and that only through the most general human associations, it's hard to make assignations of contemporary value judgments.

However ... and this is the key, I think, to the arguments concerning the obsession with youth--lacking any other substantial reason for this topic, even if we recognize the modern value judgment, we must place it in its appropriate modern comparative context. And in that context, the value judgment reduces to a phantasm at best, strung about on a pole and waved like a banner to focus a vague and unwieldy fear and loathing on the target of one's ire.

There are at least two aspects to this debate to consider: The actions of Mohammed and what we think of them. Some choose to employ the workings of a hate organization in order to justify themselves. As such, I would hope they could manage a better discussion than to simply become extensions of the haters. If there's an issue in Mohammed and Aisha that is relevant to Islam in the present, nobody has made that clear to me.

So in the meantime, it's just general considerations of the asserted principles. And that, I admit, makes the discussion a bit hazy.

It occurs to me that if the anti-Islamic crowd were to put as much energy into learning as they did into their hate, we wouldn't be having discussions like this topic; we could actually have more substantial and relevant discussions of Islam instead of a cycle of libel and defense.

:m:,
Tiassa

 

[Mrs.Lucysnow]

Yes I am disrespectful. Don't need a towel. Love staining the streets, carpets what have you. Secretions are an aphrodisiac don't you know?

Second I am explaining my point of view. All these debates are nonsensical if you want to look at them that way.

Third I am not avoiding the issue, I just have no interest right now in debating the current cultural trend towards youth. Frankly the trend doesn't bother me at all. And yea there are a lot of youthful looking 42year old women. As for the Springer fans it is in their right to go home and wack off to the madness if they so choose. The waif images depicted in the CK ads were derived from the heroin sub-culture that had emerged at the time (grungy clothing, pale skin and undernourished but with an understated aesthetic nonetheless).

If some of you like to stick to the topic then you are free to do so, others certainly did.

Well if Aisha were starving to death then she didn't have a choice did she? But then again neither does a rape victim under a knife or gun when her life is at stake. When the rape victim submits would you consider that a valid choice?

Pamela Anderson is real enough, mother of two and married to Kid Rock. Yea I tolerate such men. I don't have a problem with beautiful women being one myself. And no pedophiles are a special breed my friend, I can smell one a mile away.

I think about sex constantly too. Wake up its not just men.

If you want to know my point just read my post to Flores and Okinrus. I was challenging Okinrus notion of CHOICE. Or do you still miss this?

You asked: So you think Mohammed was a dirty old man. Tell me ... why is it important enough for you to comment on at all? I'm legitimately interested.

I was sexually abused from the age of five to eleven by a male who was not a member of my household, but otherwise had entre. I am affronted by the notion of choice that Okinrus so flippantly suggested. And I go out of my way to passionately confront those ideas whenever they arise. So yea I think that IF the prophet did indeed have a sexual relationship with Aisha then he is a wanker, dirty ole man, and a self-serving perv.

 

[Tiassa]

Lucysnow

Secretions are an aphrodisiac don't you know?

Except for the skanky kind that grow disease.

Second I am explaining my point of view. All these debates are nonsensical if you want to look at them that way.

While I agree with both sentences, it is worth pointing out that it is the intent of this board that topics maintain some kind of thematic cohesion. The theme you wish to follow seems to warrant a different topic for a different forum In that discussion, we'd probably find more common ground.

But I will not be held responsible for your choices. Only my own. One of those choices is to continue responding to you in this topic. If you do not wish to continue discussing the context of this topic, we can certainly have a discussion in the Ethics forum.

Third I am not avoiding the issue, I just have no interest right now in debating the current cultural trend towards youth.

You don't seem to have any interest in anything at present that tie your point of view to the topic.

Frankly the trend doesn't bother me at all.

See ... we differ on this point. As disturbing as I find sex with children, I find it equally, if not more disturbing that the primary social objection around me seems to be the difference between intent and action. Is the sickness in the willingness to act, or in the fixation on inappropriate fascination with sexuality and youth? As people are bound to follow their impulse, while I find the action reprehensible, I look to the fascination as the source of the sickness. If Joe's sexuality leads him to admire what you or I consider a suitable mate, we don't pause to consider his motivation in the context of who is partner is. Examinations of Joe's sexuality pertain at that point to fidelity, safety, trust, responsibility, and other "social issues". But if Joe admires something inappropriately young ... certes we have less cause to judge directly given Joe's lack of action against a child. But I still think he's got a problem.

And this shouldn't even enter the topic except for the fact that the topic depends on a modern value judgment of an old event. In assessing that modern value judgment, we must also assess the state of the modern value motivating judgment, and that's where the topic itself falls through. Without a better connection to Islam, the intended hatred of the topic becomes its focus, and in focusing on that hatred, we have focused on those considerations toward which the topic post is myopic at best.

So just to make sure I have your point of view straight: It's okay to get horny over children as long as you don't do anything about it except maybe wank?

I don't have a problem with beautiful women being one myself.

Here we differ again. I have no problem with beauty. I nearly worship beauty. But I recognize artificial beauty as well, and I value artifice differently than nature.

And no pedophiles are a special breed my friend, I can smell one a mile away.

Such a compelling argument. I may have found my first connection between homosexuality and pedophilia. (Take a note, Lon Mabon.)

As it has been with homosexuals, many people won't know there's a pedophile among them until it's blatantly obvious. In the case of pedophilia, this means that time's up! and it's too late!.

I think about sex constantly too. Wake up its not just men.

An interesting digression, and one I thank feminists for, though I haven't figured out what to do with the idea yet: It seems that my generation lives at an interesting time. Coming up, thinking about sex was taboo. In my life, the idea of a woman obsessing on sex has changed from a bad thing to a good one, and I must thank the feminists, because thinking about sex in general seems to have become more acceptable. But it has led, strangely, to a greater objectification of women. The difference seems to be that women enjoy it this time around. Actually, I'm almost jealous.

If you want to know my point just read my post to Flores and Okinrus. I was challenging Okinrus notion of CHOICE. Or do you still miss this?

And I challenged the value of the basis of your challenge. Yet you don't seem to want to discuss that aspect of it.

I was sexually abused from the age of five to eleven by a male who was not a member of my household, but otherwise had entre. I am affronted by the notion of choice that Okinrus so flippantly suggested.

And this is why it would make an excellent topic of its own in a different forum.

And I go out of my way to passionately confront those ideas whenever they arise. So yea I think that IF the prophet did indeed have a sexual relationship with Aisha then he is a wanker, dirty ole man, and a self-serving perv.

And that's fine. But in the context of the topic, you've managed to help keep that position largely irrelevant.

:m:,
Tiassa

 

[okinrus]

See, I always end up insulting someone... Forgive me? No, your absolutely right. Alisha had only two choices: to die or marry Mohammed and Zeid had only two choices: to die or divorce his wife. This is because the Islamic religion expects absolute obediance to a "prophet" of "God". In any case, before the age of fourteen, the child is not fully responsible for his or her actions. Anyways, I'm sure the mother and father of Alisha forced her to marry Muhammed. I was only offered this as a hypotetical statement to challenge thought as to why something is wrong. Also I think Tiassa is spending to much time analyzing this. God would never allow, much less order, a 50 year old man to have sex with a 9 year old. It's dangerous and disgusting, but this what false prophets are. There is no bottom to their pit. Muhammed also forcebly married a coptic christian slave and his vanity mentioned in some of the hadiths is also the sign of a pedophile or a sex addict.

 

[Mrs.Lucysnow]

Tiassa there are mods who can determine if a thread has gone completely off track, they can close a thread or move it to a more appropriate place. Interestingly you are the only one who seems concerned. Okinrus responded and left it at that. Flores responded and felt satisfied with my response. Not even the thread starter has complained about the contents in my posts. Disrespectful? I have every right to be disrespectful. With all the various content in your posts I think you threw the thread more off track than I. The thread began with a simple story of Aisha, and left it open for everyone to add their two cents. I have added mine. Don't like it fine, go bore someone else.

You are free to confront my post or ignore my posts but you do not have the right to tell me what I should or should not respond to in a post.

My secretions are pure and disease free thank you very much.

I can entertain murderous thoughts but that does not make me a murderer. A recovering alcoholic who does not pick up a drink will not have a problem due to alcohol. Similarly a male who entertains sexual fantasies of children but never acts on them is guilty of nothing. Thoughts and actions are not the same and there is no such thing as a bad thought.

I am under thirty and part of the "youthful" culture so I guess I don't find much to fuss about. But hey you can always go to the appropriate forum and start a thread on the subject.

Okinrus: Thanx for responding to my point of view and bringing something new to light. PEACE!

 

[Tiassa]

Festering

Lucysnow

I'm really trying to like your persona. Failing that, I'm really trying to respect it.

But you do these little things that make it nearly impossible.

Tiassa there are mods who can determine if a thread has gone completely off track, they can close a thread or move it to a more appropriate place.

True.

If, in the future, you insist on posting with no regard for the themes of the topic, as you have openly admitted doing, I will consider entering a complaint against your behavior. However, just because I'd rather not encourage censorship doesn't mean you have to be an example of the problems of free speech.

Interestingly you are the only one who seems concerned

What's funny about that is that it's in our conversation within this topic that it has emerged that you have no concern for the themes of the topic.

Disrespectful? I have every right to be disrespectful.

No, actually, you don't. The mods just give us extra-long leashes given the number of people who will choke out against even those.

With all the various content in your posts I think you threw the thread more off track than I. The thread began with a simple story of Aisha, and left it open for everyone to add their two cents. I have added mine. Don't like it fine, go bore someone else.

While it is enough to disagree with your fundamental perception of the topic, it is your construction of the point that compels me to a number of ill sentiments. The most objective of which is that you're either a liar or simply stupid enough to shoot your mouth off.

You wrote: The thread began with a simple story of Aisha, and left it open for everyone to add their two cents.

Perhaps you didn't read the topic post entirely? Did you miss a couple of sentences?

- The question arise: Did Mohammed just create Islam to get power and sex? I certainly get that feeling. (DJSupreme23)

Or the persistent attempts by the topic poster to keep that vein alive?

- Tell that to Khomeni. (DJSupreme23)

And even after you and I had begun our discussion?

- Khomeni even passed a fatwa based on this fact. (DJSupreme23)
- The short version is that the Qu'ran, Hadith & Sunna is the basis of the islamic culture, and when pedophile shit like this is at the basis of a culture, and used as inspiration every time the local Mulla @ a mosque has his friday prayer... abominations are bound to happen en masse. (DJSupreme23)
- Uncountable abominations and evils have been commited in the name of Allah; mohammed and Islam. Most of it with the written blessing of the "holy scriptures" of this religion. (DJSupreme23)

I mean, I know for a fact that I explained this to you before, as well. So your representation of the topic seems quite intentionally dishonest. Now take your lies, please, and in the words of Alice Cooper, stuff 'em up your muffin and go stick it in the fire.

You weren't kidding when you said you had every right to be disrespectful.

My secretions are pure and disease free thank you very much.

I wouldn't be so sure of that.

Thoughts and actions are not the same and there is no such thing as a bad thought.

So what it seems to me you're saying is that if, despite an excellent presentation on the evidence of Aisha's greater age earlier in this topic, we are to grant that Aisha was 9, Mohammed would not have been a dirty old man if he merely got hard for her, but managed to keep his hands off her?

Since we're dealing with modern value judgments, let me put a modern circumstance in front of you:

- This country is plagued by varying degrees of child pornography. It takes me all of thirty seconds to get all sorts of insanity over the net, and for no more cost than my connection and a news reader. Now, think of it. Let's imagine that there are 1,000 child pornographers in the world. We can call these people dirty, sick, depraved, monsters ... whatever you want. Because they act against the children. But out on the net what if there are, then, 100,000 people gobbling up the images of these crimes? They're not actually doing anything to the children. They're not actually paying the guys who make the child porn. And while we might say that they are not criminally responsible in this or that assault of a child, how would your modern values judge their state of mind? Everything's a-ok? No rotten eggs? No bad rice?

I am under thirty and part of the "youthful" culture so I guess I don't find much to fuss about.

You're also among the most vain and useless.

But hey you can always go to the appropriate forum and start a thread on the subject.

Look, just because you've spent too much time flat on your back doesn't mean I have to excuse your stupidity. It is well difficult to explain to you the relevance you are incapable of seeing when you openly refuse to look at the factors.

Just because you chose a lousy first lover is no reason to go mucking about blindly supporting haters. So take your god-given right to disrespect and give it a grind. When all is said and done maybe you can spare a minute to think about the fact that your blind need to sublimate your own self-loathing has compelled you to lend your voice to the cause of defamation. You may be too self-absorbed to look around and look at the results of your actions, but that's no excuse for your brand of sickness.

:m:,
Tiassa

 

[Mrs.Lucysnow]

As everyone else will read your response to my posts and your constant harrasment and insane need to attack my character, I need not defend myself since you have so successfully though ungracefully fallen off your own moral high horse.

 

[Tiassa]

True enough

That's the problem of lowering myself to meet your standards, Lucysnow.

However I now demand that you document that harassment.

After all, you are the one who has proclaimed that you have every right to be disrespectful at this forum. You are the one who has demanded your right to bear no relevance to the topic.

Perhaps in the future you should consider what happens if everyone aims as low as you do.

You don't seem to like it. So what's your excuse?

:m:,
Tiassa

 

[Mrs.Lucysnow]

Actually I don't really know what you are addressing Tiassa and you are the only one complaining. Be specific. Anyway Tiassa I don't document harrassments they are above board for everyone to see if there is indeed a case of harrassment. Also I am not squeamish that way. Flores and I have had a run in before but I don't hold a grudge, send pm's to mods or place people on ignore. This is an online dialogue and there isn't any slight here that I take to heart. Anyway I have not attacked you in any way and took on a defensive position only when you began to stoop to that level yourself. You chose to personalize, I did not. I could have raised hell over that last long post you wrote with referrences to my sexuality and character but why bother. Actually I have not stooped to anything unless you are pissed that I spoke irreverantly about the prophets, if so then address that but you have not addressed that at all, I have to assume you are referring to something else, but I am not a mind-reader. So spit it out, why are you so upset?