5 ridiclous things you probably believe about islam

[Sasha]

though it was a nice list: http://www.cracked.com/article_18911_5-ridiculous-things-you-probably-believe-about-islam.html?wa_user1=2&wa_user2=Weird+World&wa_user3=article&wa_user4=recommended

[ColonelCossack]

Though I can't say I previously believed the ridiculous facts, some of the stats were interesting.

[Yuppie Grinder]

cracked is annoying

[Ostrinski]

I love Cracked. Good to see there's other lefties that like it. And yeah, I read this article the other day. I thought it was good as well.

[Princess Luna]

Rather or not Cracked is bullshit depends on who is writing. I read a article on it one time called something like "The 5 dumbest causes championed by celebrities" the list included Mumia Abu-Jamal and Leonard Peltier. As a general rule I tend to only read articles relating to pop culture, and stay away from the historical and political shit.

[Ostrinski]

Rather or not Cracked is bullshit depends on who is writing. I read a article on it one time called something like "The 5 dumbest causes championed by celebrities" the list included Mumia Abu-Jamal and Leonard Peltier. As a general rule I tend to only read articles relating to pop culture, and stay away from the historical and political shit.I agree to a degree. But I don't take anything on there for anything more than it is: satire.

[progressive_lefty]

Just another article trying to legitimise a religion whose central figure married a 9 year old.

[Che a chara]

Just another article trying to legitimise a religion whose central figure married a 9 year old.

That's not the first time you've used this ignorant as fuck-EDL-type argument to hide your Islamohphobia.

Does it escape your attention that Muhammad married Aisha in the year friggin 619 ??

Here's a fact from the Middle Ages:

Children in the Middle Ages (http://www.localhistories.org/children.html)


Childhood ended early for children in the Middle Ages. In upper class families girls married as young as 12 and boys as young as 14. They did not normally choose their own marriage partners. Their parents arranged their marriages for them. Children from poor families might have more choice about who they married but by the time they were about 7 or 8 they had to start helping their parents by doing simple jobs such as chasing away birds when crops had been sown or helping to weave wool. Children were expected to help the family earn a living as soon as they were able.Now I don't know what age laws where back in 7th century Christianity, but at a guess, given the attitudes in the Middle Ages, i'd go with the probability that such relationships as Muhammad and Aisha would have been as similar and as common in anywhere else for that time period. - (If anyone does have any information, I'd be interested to know.)

[dodger]

http://www.google.com.ph/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=ex%20muslims&source=web&cd=1&sqi=2&ved=0CBoQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ex-muslim.org.uk%2F&ei=RG_-To7BNoytiQeT2rCjAQ&usg=AFQjCNHbyw_3bQgan8bWOj9RtgmqQiKo1Q

Note the above ISLAMAPHOBES....ALL with big grins on their mugs. Below another mob...


http://www.google.com.ph/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=ex%20muslims&source=web&cd=2&sqi=2&ved=0CB8QFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.apostatesofislam.com%2F&ei=02_-TpmqNeSjiAfbsfSeAQ&usg=AFQjCNG_dRv_eYOb3y2vJYMCaKyEz55F3g

We don't much care for our own stinking religion...strange then if we were to give other religions an easier ride.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IvvwNR3vF44

[lots of laughs]

Yeah, only an ignorant person would have been at all surprised about those 'things'. But Islam is not any more legitimized. The best the 'article' can do is make it clear that if you are going to attack the religion, it is better to have a real reason, rather than a bullshit one. And a good enough reason? The whole religion is bullshit. From the mythical god, to the pork is unclean (but beef isn't), to the taking your moral/ethical cues from a long out of date book and various other places (depending on which variant of Islam you follow). Christianity is also bullshit, as is any religion that has these (and other) problems.

[hatzel]

Now I don't know what age laws where back in 7th century Christianity, but at a guess, given the attitudes in the Middle Ages, i'd go with the probability that such relationships as Muhammad and Aisha would have been as similar and as common in anywhere else for that time period. - (If anyone does have any information, I'd be interested to know.)

I can't get concrete examples from exactly that time-period, but suffices to say there was nothing out of the ordinary for it in the culture of the time, for reasons we will get to. Before that, however, I'll pull out some examples, the two most obvious of which would be the King Richard II's 1396 marriage to Isabella of Valois, 7 at the time, and the Byzantine Empress Agnes of France, who had been (perhaps) 8 at the time of her marriage to Alexios II Komnenos in 1182 (whilst her sister, incidentally, had been living at the court of Richard I since the age of 9, in anticipation of their marriage). Of course the only examples we can get involve the royal courts, and may not reflect common practice amongst the lower echelons of society (though Muhammad was hardly a humble fisherman, so perhaps it is more suitable to look at the nobility), but the only laws concerning child marriage during this period in Europe was that it should not occur during childhood, defined to end at 7.

In the other direction in time, going back to the 3rd century in the Middle East, the writings of the rabbis (I'm using Jewish law because I happen to know what it says, and its very similar to Islamic precedent in many areas, including, I am led to believe, this one) paint a very simple picture: no sex before puberty, but when that comes, it's time to get married. Puberty, of course, marking the transition from childhood to adulthood. It appears to be the norm throughout this time period in this area (and thus any Christians in the Middle East during the 7th century would presumably operate according to similar customs) that childhood would be seen to end at the coming of puberty, and that one should then marry as quickly as possible. In fact, the vast majority of people would marry and have children during their teens, waiting longer than this being very much frowned upon. This contrasts with the old Greek approach, which seemed to be 30-year-old men marrying 12-year-old girls.

Anyway, the point (and this is the really important bit) is that Aisha had reached puberty, and was therefore seen as a 'woman' rather than a 'girl.' In Europe, on the other hand, where the law dictated that childhood ended at age 7 precisely, it appears likely that many people would have married children, that is to say, prepubescent individuals. Such would be less likely to occur in the Middle East, where the end of childhood was defined physiologically, and as such would vary according to the individual. Some people would reach puberty by the age of 7 (Lina Medina is living proof of this), but others may have to wait until they are 12 or even older; Middle Eastern culture would not set the rigid age limits seen in Europe, nor would a relationship with somebody who experienced an early onset of puberty be seen as a relationship with a child, even if they happen to be 8 years old. On the other hand, some people experience a late onset of puberty, perhaps as late as 16 or 17, and a relationship with such a 16-year-old would be subjected to a stigma that the relationship with an 8-year-old would not, it being a relationship with a 'child,' namely, a prepubescent individual; it would be forbidden in Jewish law, as in the Middle Eastern and Islamic custom, even if (get this) their partner is younger than them, perhaps 14, if they are already pubescent.

Such a marriage as Muhammad and Aisha's would definitely be considered acceptable in the 3rd century, and they were commonly practised in the 12th century, so it seems reasonable to assume that there wasn't a sudden change of attitudes between these two eras which then reversed itself completely. That is to say, it seems reasonable to believe that what we would call 'child marriages' (though the participants would not be considered 'children' at the time, having reached puberty) were common and accepted throughout the period. Which may explain why people weren't exactly lining up to voice criticism until recently, when prevailing customs and norms retroactively condemned the event; suffices to say that pre-Enlightenment Europeans (even those attacking Islam) didn't have all that much to say about the marriage, it not being out of the ordinary for them.

[dodger]

Divorce not being available to the poor, marriage for poor people in town and village was always after puberty. A sensible man would no more think of getting a wife that might prove barren as buy a chicken that was not a 'proven' layer. He would impregnate and be certain that his bride was a good choice. The wealthy on the other hand were eager to protect their investment but eager to make a good choice for daughters, so they were guarded and chaperoned, soiled goods meant reduction in price or recrimination after the wedding night. Such were the days of old England.....The attitudes of the wealthy have changed little to their daughters.....just they have adapted to the times. After all an investment is still an investment. They care nought for any interest that the girl might gain but the capital must show a return at some time soon. Truly a crises if a wealthy man's wife ran off with the chauffeur but a dreadful ruinous calamity if his daughter chose to. None of this matters, though all very interesting, a bygone age or a life far removed from our own.

What really matters is that the Brits ever on the lookout for cheap jokes against religion have found another target. Some old grey bearded Paedophile that people obey without question. What to eat, when to eat and hurl themselves to the ground 5 times a day to grovel. No wonder so many Muslims are now ex Muslims and not only Britain....but Africa some 6m annually are leaving. Now whether Islamaphobia is merely an attack on Muslims or an attack on religious ideas, is down to what is in men's hearts. At any rate atheists don't go around stoning ex atheists or indeed Muslims. There is a battle of ideas going on in society....good to see AND THE EX MUSLIMS DESERVE OUR FULL BACKING.

HERE ..... an exMuslim site forum ....yesterday.

"Thank you everybody, for the warm welcome. I have some good news, I am no longer sad. The knowledge that there are more and more apostates out there has made me content, if not happy. I have been reading almost all the threads in this forum since I last posted. Really, knowing that you guys exist, are real and communicating is very comforting to me. I am certainly not alone nor deluded as a nice Muslim recently accused me of being.

I've also found that my father share the same views though there are some parts that he didn't know. For example, he didn't know that Muhammad was a paedophile and was quite upset and disgusted when I told him about it. I feel heartened to know that someone I look up to and respect is an apostate as well. We had many long discussions about Islam keeping our people backward and stupid, and the necessity to break free from the shackles of religion."