Muhammad's child bride Aisha, the book is on hold in the UK!!!!!!!

1000 years ago Xians would have done the same. Look at the level of technology in the ME. If it's not imported from America, Europe, Japan or China or made by someone from there, then it's not there. You're looking at a culture that has just fast forwarded into the 20th century BUT are still superstitious as hell.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

My you are contentious. First I said 7-12 range. But in a number of states the age question is actually wide open.

Report: Colorado Child Bride Reunited With Husband 20 Years Her Senior Sep 11, 2007
A child bride whose husband was sent to prison after Colorado invalidated their common-law marriage has been reunited with her lover, 20 years her senior, the Denver Post reports ... The state Court of Appeals ruled on June 15, 2006, that Colorado had no stated minimum age for common-law marriage but said the state has adopted English common law, which makes girls as young as 12 and boys as young as 14 eligible for marriage (original report: http://www.denverpost.com/ci_6847554 )

Parties below minimum age may marry with parental and judicial consent at 13 - Texas, New York, New Hampshire

Parties below minimum age may marry with parental and judicial consent but no minimum age given- Oklahoma, Ohio, New Jersey, Nevada, Maine, Louisiana, Kansas, Idaho, Arkansas, Alaska, Arizona, Connecticut

Women may marry at age 12 - Colorado (hh), Massachusetts

http://topics.law.cornell.edu/wex/table_marriage

You'd have to ask the religious about that. All I know is he was acting legally and within the norms for his culture. He was even acting legally for the US since at the time she was his only wife.

So I think Islam is some where between silly and obnoxiously repressive while being suicidally dangerous too. So what? Its irrelevant to the question.

Bigotry is not more important than the truth.

Oh and please learn the difference between maximum age and average life expectancy. People can live to their hundreds even when the average life expectancy is 35. Its just not very common.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Bingo.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Most state laws allow couples to marry when they are
18 and to marry with parental consent when they are 16 or 17. A handful of states allow marriage below 16
given certain circumstances of pregnancy if the bride wants to marry the father of her child. Still, there is a
recent movement among these states to bar youth from marrying under any circumstance if they are below
16.



They only allow marriages when they are under 16 statewide when there is a pregnancy involved, however i am pretty damn sure if there is a 50 year old pervert prophet involved there would be no marriage, but charges of paedophilia, most young pregnancies involve kids of equal age, which means paedophilia does not come into it.


I am from the uk, but even i know your post was a crock of shit, dont you know america, like most countries based alot of its laws on the uk system.

 

Most is not all and the way US law works if you are legal in the state you married in, and most have no residency requirements, you are legal every where in the US (which is why some states are in the marriage business).

Click the link and read the details http://topics.law.cornell.edu/wex/table_marriage
FYI Cornell is a highly respected university in the field of law.

Colorado and Massachusetts definately allow marriage at age 12 for women with parental consent, which BTW is from your English common law. Below that age requires judicial review, but it is not illegal in 12 states.

For being documented as wrong you sure are cheeky about a foreign country's laws and you don't seem to have a good grasp of the traditional English common law ages (12 for women, 14 for men) as apposed to current English marriage laws.

You were wrong. Suck it up and get on with life.

 

:runaway:

Look, here is the thing.
1) Back then things were different.
- Slavery for example was normal.
- Sex with slaves was acceptable.
- Polygamy was the norm in the ME.
- All rulers were Prophets of a God.
- Rulers spoke for God.
- People were put to death on their word.
- Women often married young, as soon as they had their period.

2) Mohammad owned slaves (possibly had sex with one), practiced polygamy, proclaimed himself a prophet, freed some people, put others to death. He Married a girl as soon as she could reproduce (or so we hope). ALL of these things were ABSOLUTELY NORMAL in Arab tribal society. There is absolutely nothing unique in Mohammad's actions. He's just a normal Arab tribesman doing what all the other Arab nomades were doing.

3) IF Mohammad had been born a philosopher then yes, we'd expect more of him, but he wasn't, so we shouldn't hold him to the high standards of say Buddha or Socrates.

4) In addition, remember, the people who made up the Mohammad Character were more interested in the political ramifications and how that effected their rule. They were not worried about some airy fairy philosophical argument and advancement of humanity.

As SAM likes to say, Mohammad is a "real" person (you know, in the way people say GW Bush Jr is keeping it "real"). He was not one of those Philosophers who went without sex and sat under a tree thinking, no no no, God told him what to think and by-bonking, that's what he was going to think!

Michael

 

And to show how far we've come he could easily be a redneck fundy in Colorado and still have married her!

 

Thats because of the way the western mind works. When the society was prosperous in the east, they did not use the rest of the world as a labour camp and maintain dictators and poverty there. The western mind will replace and where there are too many to replace, they will exploit.

 

Now you just sound jealous.

 

No, why should I be jealous of a culture that requires people to be oppressed and poor for its sustenance?

http://www.globalissues.org/

 

thats awful, in my eyes anyone there carrieing a bollard like that should be jailed for inciting violence

why should the people of the uk be affraid to write a book, read a book even have an opinion because a certain group dont like it? if we give in to this sort of behaviour then it will happen all the more and that would be a shame

 

Has anyone demonstrated against the book? Or is this another example of preemptive strikes?

According to University of Texas Professor of history and Middle Eastern Studies, Denise Spellberg

Looks like some moron cashing in on inciting Muslims by perverting their history.

 

I think redoing islam as softcore porn would be a plus.

 

Then you probably think the creationist museum is a scream. Since the aim of both is to value ignorance fantasy over facts.

 

SAM and fantasy, synonymous.

 

I suppose you believe [like Sarah Palin] that dinosaurs and humans co-existed with the talking snake.

 

Regardless of the merit of the book, it is a sad commentary on the UK that they would allow Muslims to dictate how they do business. They cave to them on every single issue. I swear, all you have to do in the UK is say you're Muslim, throw in a bomb threat, and shit gets done for you!

I don't know if Islam really was intended to be a religion of peace, but their fringe groups are the most dangerous in the world.

 

I don't have any problem with the book. Its supposed to be a fictionalised story about Aisha. Its the ignorant westerners who cannot distinguish fact from fiction that are a problem. The WMDs were bad enough as was the "we have no evidence but so what" search for Obama in Afghanistan. Any more excuses for "liberating" people, we don't need

 

In the U.S an adult cannot legally be involved with a child. I thing the youngsters marry eachother.

 

Is that all the better you can do? pitifully just pitifully:crazy: