Just to correct Lomax's lies from actual experience.
I raise sows in my farm. When the piglets grow up to become gilts (teenage
female pigs that are virgins are called gilts.), they exhibit the equivalent
of what we would call menstrual cycle. They show their first estrus. If
you mate a gilt on her first estrus, the pregnancy will normally not take
hold and the gilts will exhibit another estrus on their next cycle about 21
days later. The gilts are not sexually mature despite the obvious occurence
of the estrus cycle. On occasions where a pregnancy takes hold, you will
end up with radically fewer piglets born and smaller piglets born. A normal
sow pregnancy is about 10-12 piglets and about 1-2 kgs of piglet weight. If
you mate a gilt on her first estrus, on average you will get less than 3
piglets with about 1/3 lbs. piglets (notice 1-2 kg is 2-5 lbs for a normal
pregnancy. A first cycle pregnancy is 1/3 lbs piglet.) Very very small
piglets that will not normally survive to weaning age. What I am saying is
documented by pig breeders everywhere so no one who is honest will claim I
am lying about this. In fact, if you read pig breeding books, they would
recommend that you wait until the second estrus to mate that gilt. This my
friends are facts.
In fact, in fact, in fact. The older the gilt is when you first mate her,
the more and bigger your piglets. This is easy to understand. An older
gilt's body is more mature and will support more piglets compared to a young
gilt on her first cycle.
The same is true with human girls. Everyone agrees that exhibiting
menstrual cycle at 9 years of age is unusually early for a little girl.
Normal menstrual age is about 11-12, most even don't cycle until they are
14. Ask any doctor. Now here comes Lomax and argues that a 9 year old
little girl is sexually mature because she has had her first cycle.
Apparently, she was not because we have no documented pregnancy of A'isha
when she was 9. Her body was simply not mature enough to carry a full term
baby to delivery, much like a young gilt. My friends, despite what Lomax
would like you to believe, nature and experience tells us an early
menstruating girl of 9 is clearly not sexually mature.
BTW, Lomax claims that a little girl's mammary glands would develop if she
has a baby. Apparently, Lomax has not seen mammary glands of first cycle
gilts who became pregnant. They are not developed despite having piglets.
It contains little milk. Piglets of young gilts need to have supplemental
milk. This my friends is the truth of the normal order of things. But
Lomax, twist it, to justify the actions of his retrograde HOLEY prophet.
(Lomax still has not caught on why I spell Holy - HOLEY. Contrary to what
Lomax would like to believe, I do know how to spell Holy. LOL ...)
Jojo
----- Original Message -----
From: "Abd ul-Rahman Lomax" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>; <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, December 28, 2012 1:02 PM
Subject: Re: [Vo]:[OT] Moon God, Dozens of wives, and marriageable age
At 10:01 PM 12/27/2012, Jojo Jaro wrote:
What are you suggesting lomax? That age is uncertain whether she was 9 or
10. Either way, what muhammed practiced was abhorrent and retrograde.
No, *Jojo* is abhorrent and retrograde. That's because he's now. What
Muhammad did wasn't abhorrent, because nobody hated it. Then. It wasn't
retrograde, either, it was not odd or strange or unusual.
If A'isha has had her first menstrual cycle, does that mean she is a
sexually mature woman.
Yes. That's what the word means. It does not mean that no further
maturation can occur. It means that she is capable of becoming a mother.
Lomax seems to believe this and asking vorticians to swallow this.
No, I don't care what Vorticians think, but I'm not seeing any support,
here, for Jojo's viciousness.
OK, show of hands, which of us with daughters 9 or 10 years old, that have
had their first mentrual cycle that we would consider to be sexually
mature.
Hand up. That is, if I knew that my daugher had her first period, I'd know
that she was sexually mature. That has consequences.
For pete's sake. These little girls do not have fully developed mammary
glands yet, and Lomax thinks they are sexually mature. This is the
corruption of islam for all to see.
The glands will work if she gets pregnant. Jojo is making silly arguments.
The issue is not today's girls, and the conditions girls face today. The
issue is Jojo's claim that was was done *then* was "abhorrent and
retrograde" *then*.
And we don't now the age. Some sources conclude that Ayesha was much
older.
OK, show of hands, which of the following sources does one consider more
reliable.
Reliable for what?
Sahih Muslim and Sahih Bukhari vs. wikipedia and Internet blogs.
For hadith, Muslim and Bukhari. For general information on Islam, hands
down, Wikipedia. Muslim and Bukhari are not manuals of Islam. They are
collections of stories, which require interpretation. They are, in
Wikipedia terms, primary sources. Use with care.
One of us cited Sahih Muslim and Sahih Bukhari indicating a testimony
from A'isha herself that intercourse occured when she was 9 or
thereabouts.
No. Sahih Muslim has an account attributed to Ayesha that she was taken to
the Prophet's house when she was nine. Not that they had intercourse.
However, that can reasonably be inferred.
Sahih Muslim Book 008, Number 3311:
'A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that Allah's Apostle (may
peace be upon him) married her when she was seven years old, and he was
taken to his house as a bride when she was nine, and her dolls were with
her; and when he (the Holy Prophet) died she was eighteen years old.
There is no isnad (which is typical for my edition of Sahih Muslim).
Muslim narrates a series of traditions on Ayesha, which are unattributed.
He did not hear this from Ayesha!
Lomax cited Internet Blogs to say that A'isha was a different age.
I didn't say she was a different age. One page gave arguments she was. I
was citing this to show the range of opinion among Muslims. It wasn't a
blog.
Which of us is more credible with better evidence? Lomax seems to
think that his evidence is stronger because he writes lengthy tiresome
essays to confuse the issue. If you are buying it, you have the right to
be stupid enough to be deceive by lies.
What Jojo is effectively lying about would be that I claimed Ayesha was
*not* nine. I pointed to evidence that she was, and evidence that she
wasn't. I wrote that I don't know how old she was, but that she was
"sexually mature," regardless. Jojo wants to quibble on that, but a
sexually mature woman is not "barely out of diapers," which he's said over
and over, unless there is some problem!
I write lengthy essays because I actually do research and report it, and I
discuss the issues. Jojo hates that. He just wants to toss his mud and be
done with it. Someone who actually checks his claims? Horrors!
OK, show of hands, which of us would follow our neighbors to commit an
abhorrent act.
*What abhorrent act?* Jojo has never been specific. And nobody here is
proposing that girls be married at nine. What I've been saying, though, is
that this *was not an abhorrent act* in the culture, the time and place
where it occurred. Nobody cared about her age, they care about her
*maturity*. And Islamic law, in some places, is still the same. Maturity,
by the way, one of the sources I cited noted, includes her reasoning and
sound judgment. But that's dicta, in a way, because only one aspect of
marriageability is being considered here.
Heck, if all our neighbors practiced beastiality, does that make our
practice of it OK?
Straw man argument. And nobody has claimed that a practice is "OK".
Rather, if a practice is universally accepted in a time, we cannot condemn
those who practiced it, it was their culture. The practice itself could be
awful, but obviously was not from theirs. If we are going to judge
individuals for doing what was common, we might become interested in *how*
they did that common practice. Were they abusive? Ayesha shows *no sign of
being an abused girl* She lived to be ninety years old, she was very
vocal, we have a lot of material from her. None of it resembles what women
abused as children are like. And I've known many such women.
What Jojo has just done is to equate a sexual relationship between a man
and a woman, consensual, open, respected by the entire society, considered
unremarkable in the culture, and not even considered a problem by his
*enemies*, later, until very modern times, with bestiality.
Lomax and a few others seems to think that because all the tribes
surrounding muhammed practice child molestation of 9 year old little
girls, that muhammed's practice of it was OK.
Of course molestation is not okay. Neither is genital mutilation. Nor
bestiality, but if Jojo really wants to fantasize about bestiality, well,
it's a free country. Just don't do it, Jojo, it's generally illegal.
If you are buying it, you have the right to be stupid enough to be
deceive by lies.
'Nuff said. I can never convince a retrograde moon god worshipper about
his abhorrent acts.
Jojo doesn't seem to realize that he would never convince *anyone* about
*anything* the way that he "evangelizes." It flat doesn't work. That's
what's is so funny about that Moon God cartoon. It's an amazing fantasy.
The Christian is somehow visiting a mosque with his daughter, and says to
her that the people praying are praying to their Moon God.
Poor girl, father like that. Now *there* is child abuse!
A man praying overhears him and pretty much threatens to kill him. But he
patienty explains that he's been decieved. The Allah that he thougth was
the Creator of the Heavens and the Earth and all between, the Merciful,
the Eternal Truth, is *actually* a Moon God.
The fantasty here is that this angry Muslim didn't just kill him! People
who start out like that man in the mosque aren't thoughtful. They won't
listen to knowledgeable Muslims. I've stood up to these people, and it was
touch and go! This is what is really funny: the man turns into a
determined martyr, he'll go and tell his people the "truth" about the Moon
God. If his people are like he was, they would indeed kill him, and the
father knows that. He thinks it's a good thing. The guy will become a
martyr.
For a Moon God myth. Made up. I don't care if the Moon God *were* called
Allah, God, Supreme Being, whatever, I don't worship a Moon God, and
neither does any Muslim.
The message? Well, the guy is out to sell comic books. The probable
message is "We are better than them. They are stupid, ignorant, and
violent."
But there is another message: All you have to do to carry the Gospel to
Muslims is tell them that they are worshipping a Moon God. They will fall
over and become lambs. Surely they are eager for thie Valuable
Information.
Looks like Jojo is trying that one here. Hey, Jojo, has this *ever*
worked? The Moon God trope is pretty new. I've seen the Pedophile Prophet
one for years. Never saw it work. The only thing that I've seen drive
Muslims away from Islam has been other Muslims. Some can be really, really
awful.
But it doesn't work to attack Muslims, even bad ones. What might work is
to *actually behave like a Christian.* Be friendly, supportive, kind. Help
people. Take some advice from the Bible, have a soft voice and loud ears.
It might take some practice.
