The problem it is not that he is informed. Not only vastly more than you, since he can actually not only read the canon in Arabic but also criticisms and counter criticisms, discussion, of the highest authorities, all in Arabic. Although we should all question whatever people tells us, he provided enough evidence that you be just either a troll or fanatical to not accept as true, or much more probable as true than what you can find, whatever Abd says.
2013/1/1 Jojo Jaro <[email protected]> > My friend, read the link first and then come and and we'll discuss. Stop > the uninformed speculations. All the things you've said is addressed by > the link. Evidence from Sahih Muslim and Sahih Bukhari is presented. > Study it first lest you look ignorant. > > > > Jojo > > > > > ----- Original Message ----- From: "Abd ul-Rahman Lomax" < > [email protected]> > To: <[email protected]>; "Vortex-l" <[email protected]> > Sent: Wednesday, January 02, 2013 3:15 AM > > Subject: Re: [Vo]:OT: The Truth about islam and little girls. > > > At 04:22 AM 1/1/2013, Jojo Jaro wrote: >> >>> First, I would like to apologize to the list for posting this despite my >>> promise not to do so. This is just too important to leave unresolved. >>> >> >> It's always "too important" to keep the promise. The whole farrago of >> topics are "too important" not to dwell on. >> >> Jojo has called himself a "turd," i.e, worthless and despicable. That's >> his own image of himself. It's a pathology that afflicts many of us, >> whether we talk about it or not, it's essentially Satanic, if you know the >> story of Satan. Satan speaks to us from "where we do not recognize him" >> (Qur'an). I.e., we think it's us, and, of course, we don't lie to >> ourselves, do we? >> >> Yes, we do. With training, the lies can be recognized. They will not >> stop, apparently, that's just the way it is. But we don't have to *believe* >> them. The ancient solution to this dilemma is to trust in reality, to keep >> identifying the voice of Satan and trust in reality *in spite of it.* Just >> keep trusting. Trust is not a belief, it's an action that is taken, an >> action to *stop* believing all the stories that Satan tells. I.e., that >> *our brain tells.* >> >> Keeping his word is not important to Jojo because he actually believes >> he's a turd. Who cares about the word of a turd, it's absurd? >> >> There is a function to our brain, it's there, and it's necessary, for >> survival. Temporary survival. We will not find what endures, only through >> listening to and believing that the patterns of neuronal activity that we >> experience are "true." They are just patterns, and patterns of patterns. >> They can be *useful,* but as soon as we believe they are truth, we are >> radically stuck. They just are what they are. >> >> Now, to the point here. >> >> On further googling the terms "bestiality" and "islam", I found this >>> page which has NOTHING to do with bestiality, but does document islam's >>> practice with regards to prepubescent little girls. >>> >> >> Getting in trouble again? Looking for stuff to toss, try all kinds of >> outrageous search terms. Just to do some research here, I think I'll Google >> "Christian bestiality." Wonder what I'll find? This research stuff is tough >> work but someone has to do it. >> >> Actually, no. I haven't entered that search and won't. Someone else can >> waste their time. >> >> Read it and decide for yourself, whether I or Lomax is lying. The >>> references are well documented medical and muslims sources, so Lomax can >>> not say they are biased. >>> >> >> I very much doubt that the pages mention me. I haven't looked yet, but I >> can already tell that there is bias present. This may come as a shock to >> Jojo, but Muslims are not of one mind on things. Just as Jojo argues, but >> not all Christians would believe his arguments, there are "strong >> arguments" made that are *made up* by some Muslims. A "scholar" wants to >> prove something, so he searches through the body of tradition, and it's >> huge, and highly variable in reliability, and finds something that seems to >> support his conclusion. He cares not at all for *other conclusions* that >> might be drawn from it. He's a bulldog, out to prove *one thing.* >> >> And so you can find all kinds of crap out there, if you search for it. >> >> A couple of points to highlight. >>> >>> 1. A'isha's age at the time of consummation is not in dispute among >>> muslim scholars. It is well documented and well accepted. She was 9 years >>> old. >>> >> >> That's arguable. I've never denied it is false, except for the "not in >> dispute" claim. I've pointed to argument by knowledgeable Muslims that >> differ on this. However, I have also, then, considered the case if the >> reports are true. The reports do not actually prove "consummation." I >> consider it likely, however, that they are about consummation, but the >> reports do not establish how the persons -- including Ayesha herself -- >> knew how old she was. >> >> This is the problem with hearsay evidence, the witness cannot be queried. >> >> *Her age in years was not considered important.* That seems incredible in >> today's world, but this wasn't today's world. This was a mostly >> non-literate society, with no birth records. Age was not a standard for >> *anything,* the present physical and mental condition of a boy or girl were >> *everything.* The consent of the wali (a girl's father, in this case), was >> *essential*. The wali determines readiness for all aspects except one, >> actual sexual maturity. It has been so in *every culture* when it was >> pre-literate, and age-based standards only arose in rule-of-law societies. >> >> So when Ayesha is *reported* as having said (recorded many years later, >> after she was dead, by someone else) that she was "nine" when she went to >> the house of the Prophet, that is a *report*. Later, the age became >> important, as people created "Islamic law." But what is clear from *all the >> sources* is that she was sexually mature, in a basic sense. They do not >> actually tell us that, but it is so obvious from context that it's >> essentially indisputable, and an example was given in what was uncovered in >> the discussions, of the adjudicated *rape* of a ten-year-old girl, by her >> "husband," purely on account of her not having reached menarche. >> >> That's the "age of consent" in very conservative Islam, and the >> *additional consent* of the parents would be necessary. >> >> Because marriage requires the *woman*'s consent, and a woman is not >> considered, under normal circumtances, to be *able* to give consent until >> menarche, the parent's consent is *not enough*. Presumably the parents did >> consent, but *they consented to betrothal, not consummation.* So for the >> "husband" to have intercourse with her -- whether it was forcible or not -- >> was what we call in the U.S. "statutory rape." She did not have the legal >> power to consent. Nor would her parents, if she is not past menarche. >> >> 2. There is evidence A'isha was prepubescent when muhammed had >>> intercourse with her. >>> >> >> Jojo has found such an assertion, on an evangelist Christian web site. >> I've just glanced at it, so far, and have not yet researched the sources. >> However, it's already obvious that they are taking an argument out of >> context, and using it to "prove" something that the actual witness would be >> horrified by. It's done by putting together evidence about various pieces >> of what must be understood as something between myth and history, a body of >> hearsay evidence, and then drawing conclusions, but not in an unbiased >> manner, as to preponderance of evidence, but to prove some pre-determined >> point. >> >> That is, there is evidence, all right, that, interpreted out of context >> and with a set of assumptions about many things, can be used to *argue* >> that she was prepubescent. But not when there was intercourse, rather when >> she went to the house of the Prophet. That actually tells us *nothing* >> about her sexual maturity or emotinal maturity at the time of consummation, >> and I've seen no story that actually bears on this, directly. >> >> 3. This practice remains a significant practice in muslim countries to >>> this day. Read about the muslim cleric in Indonesia. >>> >> >> There are all kinds of practices that happen in the world that are >> horrific to this Muslim and to many others, and if there is evidence that >> intercourse with prepubescent females is sanctioned by Muslim authorities, >> this would be a clear impeachment of those authorities as corrupt. We'll >> see what the source actually shows. >> >> It should be understood that there are, on the internet, active "Muslim >> clerics" who are promoting highly sectarian ... the technical term is >> "bullshit." >> >> 4. A little girl's body is in fact not ready for sexual intercourse and >>> pregnancy at the age of 9. >>> >> >> Humans vary. Jojo has already accepted that there is variation within the >> species, and there is also variation due to environmental conditions. No >> such statement about readiness can be made, generally. The youngest >> recorded mother was apparently five years old, this was modern. She gave >> birth by Caesarian section, but it appears that was precautionary, that was >> no proof that she could not bear children normally. There are *many* >> recorded instances of mothers at 10, which is be adequate to show that >> sexual maturity at 9 (ability to conceive and bear) is within human >> possibility. >> >> Jojo consistently argues the norm as if it proves that a specific case is >> outside the possible range. He continually betrays bias, that his >> conclusion is set, and here we can see it in his language, which is not >> that of medical report, which would never use the imprecise and inaccurate >> term "little." I've seen eight-year-olds who are full-sized. Are they fully >> mature? I haven't seen one. Maturity, which is equivalent to the "natural >> age of consent," is a combination of sexual maturity, the state of the body >> with regard to reproduction and desire for sexual relationship, and >> emotional and social maturity, which is a matter of judgment. In ancient >> societies, the judgment was exercised by the guardian, not by rule-of-law >> with respect to age. >> >> And it's still the same, in fact, what rule-of-law has done is to set >> certain limits that require judicial discretion. >> >> Regular ovulation does not start until a significant amount of time >>> after menses (regularly up to 2 years from the first menses.) Mammary >>> gland start of development does not start until the first menses. >>> >> >> I pointed to a photo of that five-year old. Developed, pendulous breasts. >> >> Check out the medical references. >>> >> >> I have checked medical references. The body is designed to handle these >> situations. Very, very important point: *consent.* This is not the place >> for a full exploration of the law of consent, but it's totally neglected by >> Jojo et al. >> >> So suppose this is the situation. >> >> 1. Age of girl is *unknown*. She's thought to be young, though, let's say >> she's thought to be nine. But it's uncertain. >> 2. Girl has passed menarche. >> 3. She appears physically mature, not a "little girl." >> 4. She has her dolls, they are important to her, but her relationship >> with them is as is normal for an older girl who still has her childhood >> dolls. (I know women who are *past menopause* who still have their dolls. >> They pass them on to their children. >> 5. Her parents consent to marriage. >> 6. She is emotionally and socially mature. >> 7. She consents to the marriage and to completion. >> >> Is this girl "marriageable"? If not, when, and how is the society to >> judge? Remember, they have no birth records. >> >> Let me add an additional condition. Normal men look at her and see her as >> attractive. Remember, they do not know how old she is. We are talking about >> possibilities here. If the girl were seen by her society as a "little girl, >> immature," the society would have considered the marriage and consummation >> as unconscionable, and it is totally apparent that they did not consider >> this. >> >> This is what I said with my pig breeding posts that many found to be >>> too offensive. Now, decide for yourself which of us both is lying. >>> >> >> Pig sexual maturity is no guide as to human sexual maturity, any more >> than the sexual maturity of a mouse would be. As to mice, breeding is a >> complex process that is triggered by the presence of a male mouse; it's >> likely that the human process is somewhat similar. The whole process of >> normal sexual attraction is not something that takes place in isolation, >> it's an interaction between male and female. A normal male may be >> attracted, in some sense, to a prepubescent female, but the complex process >> that leads to actual and consensual intercourse does not normally happen. >> (In modern American society, some girls are trained to appear sexy, made-up >> to appear more mature than they are, trained to move in sexually-attractive >> ways, dressed for sexual attractiveness, etc. That says nothing about how >> they would appear without all these trappings. We are talking, in the >> traditions, about *neighbors.*) >> >> >> <http://www.answering-islam.**de/Silas/childbrides.htm#s4<http://www.answering-islam.de/Silas/childbrides.htm#s4> >>> >ht**tp://www.answering-islam.de/**Silas/childbrides.htm#s4<http://www.answering-islam.de/Silas/childbrides.htm#s4> >>> >>> Please read the link before you call for my banning and decide for >>> yourself if this practice is acceptable to you. Decide if you will allow >>> this practice to your 9 year old daughter. Decide which of us both is >>> lying. >>> >> >> I've now concluded that Jojo should be banned, but what is on that site >> is irrelevant to it. >> >> My conclusion is based on his obvious and demonstrated inability to >> voluntarily refrain from continuing his highly contentious and off-topic >> debates on the list. >> >> Had he merely said something like, "I found this and I think it's >> relevant to the question of Ayesha's condition at her marriage, so I want >> to post the link, but I will not continue discussion of this here," it >> could have technically violated the promise, but would have been far less >> objectionable. >> >> "What practice?" Again, I have not done more than scan the anti-Muslim >> source. If Jojo is claiming that Muslims condone sex with prepubescent >> girls, *under any circumstances*, he's telling not only an untruth, but it >> is certainly false about this Muslim. No, I do not condone that *at all.* >> So who is lying? >> >> And why is all this on the Vortex list? I'm responding here *because it's >> here.* >> >> I am not claiming the site is unbiased, I am claiming that the >>> references in the site is unbiased. Muslim sources should be acceptable to >>> muslims. >>> >> >> Why? There is no "central authority" that decides what is acceptable to >> all Muslims. Jojo is making a radically incorrect assumption, and he's >> making it because he wants to tar all of us with the same brush. I'll look >> at the source separately. >> >> Instead of saying Lomax has "excellent" research skills, why not just >>> research the links and references of this site. >>> >> >> I have never recommended that anyone depend solely on my claims, if a >> matter is important to them. I provide sources and discuss them. It takes a >> lot of work. >> >> Decide for yourself which of us both is lying. >>> >> >> That's the argument of a troll. >> >> Research for yourself before you are "enthralled" by Lomax's lengthy >>> essays and assume that it is a "well-researched" response. >>> >> >> Most users here are *irritated* by my long essays. A few have read them >> and have appreciated them, and they are starting to burn out, themselves. >> Enough, already. >> >> Generally, my research is not truly deep. It's what I consider enough for >> a decent first impression. Where I have knowledge of a field, my overall >> comments might be well-informed. But I also make mistakes. >> >> PS. Note that I have not insulted Lomax in this posts at all. But if >>> he finds the truth offensive, there is nothing I can do about that. >>> >> >> Jojo thinks all this is about trading insults. >> >> Jojo mentioned me five times in his post. >> >> What do I have to do with the history of this "little girl"? He's implied >> that I -- and all Muslims -- would condone child rape. If that is not an >> insult, what is? >> >> > -- Daniel Rocha - RJ [email protected]
