Gawd, what a naff, enabling photographFFS, a faceless woman, slightly out of focus, specifically positioned in the background, while two selfish narcissists grin smugly like imbeciles
Thank you for the explanation.That depends on who you listen to. At the time, children being married off when they were kids was happening all over Europe. Think about the various royal families. But sex between the couple didn't happen until the girl was 15/16. So child marriage was a sign of the times.
In Islam, it isn't actually certain how old Aisha was because the dates given don't tally up against others. Now some Muslims believe that Aisha was a lot older than that and it's even been suggested that she'd 'been around the block a few times'. This was considered dreadful by later clerics so the child marriage was constructed to cover this up. There is no proof of this as far as I know. Others say she was only a child because she was playing with her dolls when they came to prepare her for the prophet.
I tend to believe the 'been round the block a few times. The prophet hadn't married virgins before Aisha and probably wasn't bothered about her either. Plus, she was an incredible woman in her own right. She led armies into battles. And she wasn't above putting her husband in his place.
So make of it what you will.
Dressed horrifyingly like a HandmaidFFS, a faceless woman, slightly out of focus, specifically positioned in the background, while two selfish narcissists grin smugly like imbeciles
not seeing much compassion hereThe whippings and stoning are mentioned in the Quran, yes, but in the excerpts itself it is said that those types of corporal punishment are:
1) only applied in countries applying Wahabi believes and Sharia Law, so the punishment are NOT mandatory in other countries that apply either the belief or laws. Most countries reject both because they’re questionable in practice
2) Not a top priority
3) why is it not top priority? Because:
A) we are told to be compassionate and forgiving and not harbour revenge
B) it will be left to the judge’s decision
3) therefore:
A) if the corporal punishment were then chosen, it’s because someone (e.g: family members) do not want to cast forgiveness and demand them to be whipped or stoned —> then this is the fault of these individuals for opting violence as a solution
B) the judge can decide on whether to apply corporal punishment to certain crimes or to make them pay fines or do jail time instead
I’m not sure what ‘insightful’ revelation they think they’re making: “I am biologically female, and this ruling affects biological females, ergo this ruling affects me”.How about no.
Fucking wierd.bizarre
Historically speaking, you do know that during the 1900s under the invasion of the Dutch, British, Portuguese, and the Japanese their president had to make a pact with Aceh to borrow their resources to fend off them who tried to force Christianity by killing their people? And in return this pact allows Aceh to be part of the country but in return they are allowed to erect their own laws apart from Democracy? You do realise they were once had their own kingdoms then turned into separate states before uniting as a republic? You cant segregate a discussion without looking at their historical backgroundnot seeing much compassion here
Its 2022 so what happened in the 1900's has no bearing on concert sized crowds that follow islam cheering and filming with their mobile phones whilst people are publicly beaten for having same sex relationships or showing affection outside marriage. The vidoe's of this happening are brutal which is why I never linked them. I will give you the benefit of the doubt assuming that your internet may be monitored in your country so criticising islam could lead to action against you. Whilst this debate is interesting I don't want to derail the thread by turning this into a thread that criticises Islam and gender ideology. Lets leave it just to the latterHistorically speaking, you do know that during the 1900s under the invasion of the Dutch, British, Portuguese, and the Japanese their president had to make a pact with Aceh to borrow their resources to fend off them who tried to force Christianity by killing their people? And in return this pact allows Aceh to be part of the country but in return they are allowed to erect their own laws apart from Democracy? You do realise they were once had their own kingdoms then turned into separate states before uniting as a republic? You cant segregate a discussion without looking at their historical background
You probably missed reading my reply but as stated above, it was the judge’s decision and her family to impose corporal punishment.
Do you think they jus stand there and do nothing about it? They complained and they rallied about the issue in Aceh but it’s not as simple as pushing Boris to the parliament to confess. It has to do with history, and frankly speaking, to be able to held a protest let alone a massive one is a privilege in itself.
You can’t participate in a rally to fight against a cause without having proper access to medicine, you have to be healthy to participate, you must have a job you can leave for a day to participate in a rally and still getting paid, to have the resource, etc. to keep demanding them to fight the invincible fight just because you don’t see them on a daily basis doesn’t mean they didn’t try their best.
If we’re against corporal law then we should abolish any types of death punishment. and to advocate for fairness in jail so all prisoners, no matter their crime shouldn’t get beaten to death by the other prisoners or the prison guard.
After all, beating someone isn’t very compassionate no matter the crime, gender, religion, height, weight, colour
Hear HearIts 2022 so what happened in the 1900's has no bearing on concert sized crowds that follow islam cheering and filming with their mobile phones whilst people are publicly beaten for having same sex relationships or showing affection outside marriage. The vidoe's of this happening are brutal which is why I never linked them. I will give you the benefit of the doubt assuming that your internet may be monitored in your country so criticising islam could lead to action against you. Whilst this debate is interesting I don't want to derail the thread by turning this into a thread that criticises Islam and gender ideology. Lets leave it just to the latter
We need an eye roll reaction.How about no.
You would really think that a 'trans man' who has just lost the right to abortion would be forced to grapple with how downright stupid gender ideology is, wouldn't you? How, on a personal level, can you lose a right like that and still think there's any weight to 'gender' whatsoever? This person can't identify out of misogyny, they might think they're a man but they've still just lost a right as a woman. I would honestly think this whole charade would be collapsing right now for 'trans men' in America. It truly boggles the mind.How about no.
Honestly wouldn't be surprised if some of them didn’t believe this will apply to them, such are their beliefs(delusions) that they are pregnant men not pregnant women.You would really think that a 'trans man' who has just lost the right to abortion would be forced to grapple with how downright stupid gender ideology is, wouldn't you? How, on a personal level, can you lose a right like that and still think there's any weight to 'gender' whatsoever? This person can't identify out of misogyny, they might think they're a man but they've still just lost a right as a woman. I would honestly think this whole charade would be collapsing right now for 'trans men' in America. It truly boggles the mind.
This is part of the reason that I no longer support Trans Ideology in any way, shape or form. Placing the importance on gender instead of sex is literally sending some people insane. Gender has no importance whatsoever. You might as well call it fashion or use fashion in a similar way. Can you imagine people who identify as (insert fashion house here) Can't think of any, sorry.You would really think that a 'trans man' who has just lost the right to abortion would be forced to grapple with how downright stupid gender ideology is, wouldn't you? How, on a personal level, can you lose a right like that and still think there's any weight to 'gender' whatsoever? This person can't identify out of misogyny, they might think they're a man but they've still just lost a right as a woman. I would honestly think this whole charade would be collapsing right now for 'trans men' in America. It truly boggles the mind.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?