On Jul 23, 6:56Â am, dh@. wrote:
> On Tue, 22 Jul 2008 18:08:08 GMT, jesucris...@
netscape.net (marques de sade) wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 22 Jul 2008 11:03:44 -0100, dh@. wrote:
>
>>>>it's easy. i called you on how you were saying there was nothing
>>>>wrong with a 6 year old marrying 51 year old muhammed...
>
>>> Â Â To make it similar for us the girl would have to be 18,
>>>but you probably won't ever get that far with it.
>
>>if it was 18 with mohammed, there wouldn't be an issue...
>
> Â Â It was obviously the equivalent of 18 with mohammed
> so there's no issue with that, as I've pointed out to you
> a number of times already.
It's not exactly "the equivalent" of 18, since there is a significant
difference between a pre- and post- pubescent child. Instead of
trying to create a contemporary analogy to justify or explain marrying
off young girls, a better angle would be to simply say what they did
conformed to the values and culture of that time and place, and then
to investigate what informed that culture, why those values existed.
That said, "marques de sade" obviously is incapable of expanding his
consciousness beyond the limited cultural/religious context in which
he exists. It is absolutely pointless to attempt to explain to him
how and why his personal beliefs are irrelevant when discussing the
practices of a society about which he is completely ignorant.
>>the whole world witnessed your inability to stand behind your
>>assertions... Â clearly you were jiving when you said there was no
>>issue with mohammed and aysha...
>
> Â Â You're the one saying there was an issue, yet you
> can't explain what it might be. What do you think
> would be wrong with a man arranging for his daughter
> to marry someone who he considers to be one of the
> most respectable people who has ever lived, when
> she reaches the accepted age for a girl to marry?
What's wrong with it is that women aren't cattle, to be passed around
according to their fathers' wishes.
