Loudmouth,

Your posts of 9 March

McAdam is spot on when he reproduced your questions and asked you

“Now please tell me, if you are rational, won't the reader assume from this question, that Quran supports all these atrocities?”

OBSERVATION: Your Islamopobe statements are what they are whether you place or don’t place question marks after them. This message is too loud in your posts for you to hide in the cloak of a genuine questions. Genuine questions stand out for their genuineness.

After having been confronted, now you say:

1- <<I did NOT state that the Koran was so backward that it supported child marriage>>; and

2- <<And frankly, I don't care whether Aisha was two or twenty, that was then, this is now: time and circumstances and societies change (usually)>>

Are you saying that you mean what you said in 1 and 2 above? Let us know to try to give a constructive turn to our discussion, if we can.

Your question <<Does the Koran condone such vile crimes as those listed above ?>> is there again despite my previous answers and REPEATED quotes from Quran that it does not support anything vile.

You repeat it despite clear answer from McAdam today << that none of this rubbish is supported by Quran and none of it is Islam.>>

This only confirms my OBSERVATION above that you are in fact an Islamophobe trying to hide your hatred under your right of asking questions.

As an ordinary Muslim, who has tried all his life not to harm anyone and there are millions upon millions of Muslims like me, I find myself under attack from two sides:

• by the terrorists who use my faith to justify their horrific crimes, on one side; and
• by the extremists who use the terrorists to distort of the peaceful face of my faith, on the other.

The infuriated Muslim masses are mobilising their governments against the terrorists.

Are you with the extremists who spread hate against Muslims? This would be my second question for you.
Answer before you ask next question.

NC, very well said.

Igor, most fools know enough when to stay silent.

NC,

What readers might make of my questions and McAdam's responses, is up to them, not me. I'm not making statements or declarations, I'm simply asking questions, which you and McAdam dodge.

I'm seriously wondering if you and McAdam can tell the difference between an statement and an assertion or declaration, and a question, a query, or an inquiry. I am asking, not declaring - can you understand the difference ? [that's a question, not a statement]

Perhaps it has something to do with different frames of reference, a revelatory rather than an inquiring framework, an epistemological discord. Like a simple-minded version of Socrates, I'm trying to ask questions, but you/McAdam insist on asserting that I am making statements or declaration.

No, I'm not: I'm asking if the Koran supports vile practices such as child marriages, or those perpetrated by ISIS, and you insist on assuming that I am asserting that the Koran supports those practices. I don't know if the Koran does, that is why I am asking. Asking, not stating. [that itself is a statement]

Can you see the difference ? [that's a question]

I suspect that you do [that's a statement], and that you are deliberately obfuscating, prevaricating [look them up, Igor] in order not to have to answer. But that's only a suspicion, how you respond will demonstrate it one way or the other. [that's also a statement] :)

Joe

I see the white crow still has crap to regurgitate.

Continues:-

Loudmouth,

The way you have framed your question, shows that the the flag waving goons hired to tarnish the image of Islam are succeeding in convincing the gullible of the world. Succeed they should, considering the investment. Did you know that the six “rogue states”—Cuba, Iran, Iraq, Libya, Syria, North Korea—have a combined annual military budget of $15 billion. The U.S. budget for covert operations alone is double this amount, (imagine the budget of the Western World). Where are all those billions going these days? Any guess?
Mind you, this success to spread falsehood is short lived, as truth does prevail, as it shall. One day you would know the reality of these "WMD" too.

Do you see? I guess, you still don't. After all there is an all out effort to make the gullible raging bulls to see the red rag only and not the hand behind it.

It is up to you if you to choose to remain to be the beast....ultimately destined for the dinner table of the hand, waving the red rag; the oligarchy running the world.


And then you say;
"I hope Islam can one day become a religion of peace, reason, enquiry, harmony and love for our fellow-human beings, regardless of what god they may believe"

Why don't you find out yourself what Islam is about, by using the primary source? Why are you dependent on secondary sources of questionable reliability for the important questions in your mind?

The basic point is that the propagandist that aim to keep you focussed on the red rag of Islam, will continue to treat you like a beast and will continue to exploit your ignorance, unless you develop the habit of seeking the truth and verifying the crap being fed to you.

Good luck.

PS; you think you are asking questions like Socrates?
Please have mercy on that sage.
He asked genuine and serious questions. If you disagree, please quote a single question, that he ever asked, answer of which was already written in a book?
Or if he ever made ill founded allegations.

Concluded.

What's the fuss?
For the umpteenth time everyone is in violent agreement that, the rule of law of this land must be obeyed and no one has the right to take away someone else's right to choose

The scare mongering tactics of yelling Sharia law and Muslim takeover are annoying cheap deflections and non issues. To the bigots who don't get this, spell out the first statement repeatedly until it finally sinks in.

Despite a common ground for common respect, some on this post can't help their insatiable hate. Like ground hogs day trapped in an episode of the twilight zone, these bigots continue to carry out cheap attacks of misquoting Quranic texts and searching for the one bad apple as a pre-text for burning the entire orchard. When a rational response is awarded, they pretend no response was given, blocking their ears and yelling like a perpetual child.

The incident in Sydney around a 27yr old marrying a 12 year old in the modern day is genuinely regrettable. I for one cannot bring myself to support it.

But to see the bigots using this to indulge their hatred for the 1.6 billion human being who are muslim, is the tragedy that I think this article is trying to point out.

Do they not know that the 'current' legal age for marriage in the state of Massachusetts in the United States is 12?

Do they not know that the Age of the Mary was 12 when she married Joseph who was 90 (New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia)?

Do they not know it was only 1832 that age consent was introduced in the French penal code and was set to 11 years old?

The close minded, hate filled hypocrisy is self-evident for any independent educated observer

The paradox is that these bigots are precisely what they claim to hate. They belong in the dark ages with their single minded bigotry, they are threat to the modern world and all that is peaceful. Pathetic little un evolved humanoids masquerading as civilised.