DIBdaQUIB Posted August 19, 2012 Share Posted August 19, 2012 You're certainly free to disagree if you'd like. I don't believe it's a 'cop-out'. Weinberg's point is exactly that. The choice of which way to go, morally, has nothing to do with religion, as we have 'good' and 'evil' in us all. When we do good things, we are good people....and that goodness resulted from the wellspring of goodness inherently within us. When we do evil things, we are evil people....and that evilness resulted from the wellspring of evilness inherently within us. However, as Weinberg notes, that when people do things, let's say, persecute gays, assassinate doctors and bomb abortion clinics, ram fully loaded and fully fueled jumbo jets into office buildings, marry 9 year olds in order to have sexual relations with them, persecute women for being possessed by demons or the devil for being outspoken and independent, or whatever else they deem her to meet the standards of witchcraft over the years, chop off the tips of little boys' penises, chop off bits of genitalia off little girls, and many other things we would normally call 'evil', and do it because they believe it is 'good' and 'right' and 'righteous' then it can, among other things, require a set of beliefs and dogma that a person truly believes has come from a true divine source.....aka religion, in order to commit those evil acts. That's not a cop out at all, it's unvarnished reality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satan's Evil Twin Posted August 19, 2012 Author Share Posted August 19, 2012 Off the top of my head, I think yes but don't take my word for it just yet. I don't know the specific hadith relating to it. I do know that it was a woman who suggested for Muhammad (pbuh) and Aisha (ra) to be married, and that the Prophet (pbuh) had a dream about the marriage. I am almost 100% sure the marriage was consented, and I'm 100% sure it was a good marriage - if you take the hadiths as primary sources of truth (which, I don't see why you shouldn't in most cases) then you will find a detailed narration of their marriage and you'll find it was healthy and good. If you would like to think Muhammad (pbuh) was a pedo and or child molester, I think you are free too, but don't think I do and don't say I support pedos molesting children or infants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jägermeister Posted August 19, 2012 Share Posted August 19, 2012 Off the top of my head, I think yes. I don't know the specific hadith relating to it. I do know that it was a woman who suggested for Muhammad (pbuh) and Aisha (ra) to be married, and that the Prophet (pbuh) had a dream about the marriage. I am almost 100% sure the marriage was consented, and I'm 100% sure it was a good marriage - if you take the hadiths as primary sources of truth (which, I don't see why you shouldn't in most cases) then you will find a detailed narration of their marriage and you'll find it was healthy and good. If you would like to think Muhammad (pbuh) was a pedo and or child molester, I think you are free too, but don't think I do and don't say I support pedos molesting children or infants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeremyW Posted August 19, 2012 Share Posted August 19, 2012 Off the top of my head, I think yes. I don't know the specific hadith relating to it. I do know that it was a woman who suggested for Muhammad (pbuh) and Aisha (ra) to be married, and that the Prophet (pbuh) had a dream about the marriage. I am almost 100% sure the marriage was consented, and I'm 100% sure it was a good marriage - if you take the hadiths as primary sources of truth (which, I don't see why you shouldn't in most cases) then you will find a detailed narration of their marriage and you'll find it was healthy and good. If you would like to think Muhammad (pbuh) was a pedo and or child molester, I think you are free too, but don't think I do and don't say I support pedos molesting children or infants. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slaytanic Wehrmacht Posted August 19, 2012 Share Posted August 19, 2012 Is a girl of 6 really able to give consent? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharpshooter Posted August 19, 2012 Share Posted August 19, 2012 I have no problem with your examples or your argument. However, there are just as many evils perpetrated by mankind that have nothing to do with religion which is why I earlier refered to Hitler, Stalin etc. The greatest examples of human suffering and atrocities against humans (WW I, WWII, Communist Russia, etc) had nothing to do with religion. The purpose was not to defend religious persecutors but to illustrate how it is the human condition that leads to these atrocities aginst our fellow humans. Religion is just a useful tool often manipulated by evil people. Where it is not available for this purpose, mankind finds other reasons/means to commit atrocities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GLASSJAW Posted August 19, 2012 Share Posted August 19, 2012 I know religious views guide as very strongly (I personally don't follow any particular religion, at least not openly, because I believe it is too easily abused.) A 9 year old girl is hardly age enough to consent to marriage let alone old enough to independantly hold up their religious views. I swear, you could find any 6 year old and ask them what the signficance of sex\marriage is and they likely won't give you a proper mature, well guided answer. But I am asking that you take a step back and take an unbiased perspective of what that suggests, then appreciate why someone in modern society would be absolutely appauled by it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharpshooter Posted August 19, 2012 Share Posted August 19, 2012 You know he's talking about a child from a billion year ago, correct? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super19 Posted August 19, 2012 Share Posted August 19, 2012 Is a girl of 6 really able to give consent? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GLASSJAW Posted August 19, 2012 Share Posted August 19, 2012 Or roughly 1406 years ago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharpshooter Posted August 19, 2012 Share Posted August 19, 2012 This question has so many social implications to it. Could be for good discussion as well. But we are talking about a particular marriage with much information on it for you to make a better opinion. It freaks you out today, I see why, but it's not fair to put our social standards to a society over 1400 years back. Also, is your idea of marriage the same as theirs?That should take away your disgusting feeling. Next is determining if the marriage was healthy or unhealthy, you can read on that marriage yourself and then make your educaated opinion. was it abusive, good or average? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jägermeister Posted August 19, 2012 Share Posted August 19, 2012 But we are talking about a particular marriage with much information on it for you to make a better opinion. It freaks you out today, I see why, but it's not fair to put our social standards to a society over 1400 years back. Also, is your idea of marriage the same as theirs?That should take away your disgusting feeling. Next is determining if the marriage was healthy or unhealthy, you can read on that marriage yourself and then make your educaated opinion. was it abusive, good or average? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sharpshooter Posted August 19, 2012 Share Posted August 19, 2012 Yup, and "only" 400 years ago in England, ten year olds with a basic grammar school education would be reading Greek and Latin and French with ease. And if they had any value in their blood, they'd be married off around the same time due to class structure. The deeper into history you go, the "weirder" it gets, and it makes absolutely no sense to compare a child today with a child then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buddhas Hand Posted August 19, 2012 Share Posted August 19, 2012 Is a girl of 6 really able to give consent? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeremyW Posted August 19, 2012 Share Posted August 19, 2012 You know he's talking about a child from a billion year ago, correct? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super19 Posted August 19, 2012 Share Posted August 19, 2012 What's different about having sex with a 9 year old today versus 1406 years ago? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeremyW Posted August 19, 2012 Share Posted August 19, 2012 You mean having sex with those capable past puberty? It was socially accepted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Satan's Evil Twin Posted August 19, 2012 Author Share Posted August 19, 2012 You mean having sex with those capable past puberty? It was socially accepted. Some were, some weren't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GLASSJAW Posted August 19, 2012 Share Posted August 19, 2012 Why not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super19 Posted August 19, 2012 Share Posted August 19, 2012 Well I guess not having sex with children wasn't one of the messages god wanted to pass on. Why is it wrong today? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.