[quote]pookie wrote:
Schwarzfahrer wrote:
Because, from a primitve point of view, he is doing her a favour. Now she has a place in society, a future and a family and doesn’t have to beg or even prostitute herself.
That shouldn’t prevent us from pointing out that a society that offers its women a choice between prostitution or childhood marriage as career choices has somewhat more than a few shortcomings.
[/quote]
Exactly. It is up to the West to civilise these people. Just like the British got rid of wife-burning in India, we need to get in there and clean up their act.
Of course, how you do that w/o US Marines is problematic.
[quote]Schwarzfahrer wrote:
Sure way to heat up the debate, as you undoubtly know.
She was 6 when he wed her and she became his favorite wife. I dimly recall she was 9 when he took her (no kidding), but I may have to look it up, depending on what Lixy will tell us.
As a muslim, this is, of course, a great argument for wdding children.[/quote]
The Muslim view is, I think, that women are evil and become tempters of men, unless they get hitched very early. Hitler believed the same stuff and advocated early marriage, only his goal was to get rid of syphillis.
Exactly. It is up to the West to civilise these people. Just like the British got rid of wife-burning in India, we need to get in there and clean up their act.
Of course, how you do that w/o US Marines is problematic.[/quote]
When Charles Napier banned suttee - widow burning - local Brahmin priests complained that he was interfering with an important national, cultural custom. In reply:
“My nation also has a custom…When men burn women alive, we hang them. Let us all act according to national custom.”
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Exactly. It is up to the West to civilise these people. Just like the British got rid of wife-burning in India, we need to get in there and clean up their act.
Of course, how you do that w/o US Marines is problematic. [/quote]
There is an enormous difference between marrying young and murdering people. The former is relative, and some people hit puberty much sooner than others, while the latter is simply unacceptable. I am not saying that I consider 11 years even remotely appropriate for marriage, but I don’t think you should be so quick to judge based on nothing more than a picture.
For all we know, it’s not a carnal union and they won’t be having sex until the girl feels OK with it. Nothing wrong with pitying that she’ll need to learn how to cook and will be having arguments with her mother-in-law instead of playing in the schoolyard, but that’s life in Afghanistan.
And I should also point out the obvious point that you clearly missed in your post: The US attacked and invaded Afghanistan (something that I consider was self-defense) in 2001. They overthrew the Talibans and installed a US-friendly regime. Said regime forbade the practice of marrying at a young age. Tribes in the mountains don’t give too shits about what the central government or anyone else thinks, and continue to live by the rule that best suit their environment. Pray tell us if you have any other plans to “civilise” the locals.
Since y’all want to “civilise” the Afghans (keep in mind that you tried that at gunpoint already), let me know what arbitrary age you want to set for marriage.
What would you change in the following UN resolution?
[quote]lixy wrote:
Since y’all want to “civilise” the Afghans (keep in mind that you tried that at gunpoint already), let me know what arbitrary age you want to set for marriage.
What would you change in the following UN resolution?
I don’t want to change them. I have not interest in doing that. I just want them to keep the opium poppy flowing steadily. As far as I a concern that is there job and duty to the rest of the world. The rest of it, as long as they keep to themselves, I am more than happy to let them be and stay the disgusting vermin they wish to be.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
lixy wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
The Muslim view is, I think, that women are evil and become tempters of men, unless they get hitched very early.
Hitler believed the same stuff and advocated early marriage, only his goal was to get rid of syphillis.
Nazis and Muslims actually have a lot in common.
Bollocks!
You clearly know nothing about Islam. Please substantiate your claims or shut the hell up.
Both groups want (or wanted) to kill people over what they claimed was ‘their land’. There’s the second similarity.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
lixy wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
The Muslim view is, I think, that women are evil and become tempters of men, unless they get hitched very early.
Hitler believed the same stuff and advocated early marriage, only his goal was to get rid of syphillis.
Nazis and Muslims actually have a lot in common.
Bollocks!
You clearly know nothing about Islam. Please substantiate your claims or shut the hell up.
Both groups hate Jews. How’s that for a starter? [/quote]
You are displaying every attribute of an idiot here.
I asked you to substantiate the part where you say “I think, that women are evil” in the Muslim view.
It’s been a while since I’ve become desensitized to your never failing adherence to Goodwin’s law.
But since my finals are over, let’s play…
About Hitler advocating early marriage, I’ll have you know that the US government is doing the exact same thing in an effort to curb out-of-wedlock pregnancies.
As to you shameless and obvious amalgam of Palestinians and Muslims plus Jews and Zionists, there’s hardly any point discussing it. I highly suspect it’s yet another one of your troll-ish posts.
[quote]pat36 wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
lixy wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
The Muslim view is, I think, that women are evil and become tempters of men, unless they get hitched very early.
Hitler believed the same stuff and advocated early marriage, only his goal was to get rid of syphillis.
Nazis and Muslims actually have a lot in common.
Bollocks!
You clearly know nothing about Islam. Please substantiate your claims or shut the hell up.
Both groups want (or wanted) to kill people over what they claimed was ‘their land’. There’s the second similarity.
There are others. Shall we continue?
Hey good point! Yes, please continue.
[/quote]
Muslims and Nazis both believe that rioting is an excellent response to anything. The Nazis had Kristalnacht, burning down synagogues and Jewish-owned businesses, the Muslims riot over cartoons and a little old lady letting a kid name a teddy bear ‘Mohammed’. At least the Nazis had brains enough to riot over a Jew killing a Nazi official in Paris.
Muslims and Nazis also hate democracy. When they do allow voting, you have one handpicked candidate, then idiot defenders of the regime call it an election. To be a candidate in Nazi Germany, you had to be a Nazi. To be in the government of Iran, for ex, you have to be…guess what…a Muslim.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
To be a candidate in Nazi Germany, you had to be a Nazi. To be in the government of Iran, for ex, you have to be…guess what…a Muslim. [/quote]
Will you never quit your disinformation?
Christians and Jews have every right to run for office in Iran. In fact, parliamentary seats are reserved for members of religious minorities. Straight out of the Wiki:
After the Persian Constitutional Revolution, the Constitution of 1906 provided for reserved Parliamentary seats granted to the recognized religious minorities, a provision maintained after the 1979 Iranian Revolution. There are 2 seats for Armenians and one for each other minority: Assyrians, Jews and Zoroastrians.
If you want to criticize a country for not letting religious minorities even have houses of worship (something that’s a clear and direct violation of Quranic principles) let alone be in the government, try Saudi Arabia.
[quote]lixy wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
To be a candidate in Nazi Germany, you had to be a Nazi. To be in the government of Iran, for ex, you have to be…guess what…a Muslim.
Will you never quit your disinformation?
Christians and Jews have every right to run for office in Iran. In fact, parliamentary seats are reserved for members of religious minorities. Straight out of the Wiki:
After the Persian Constitutional Revolution, the Constitution of 1906 provided for reserved Parliamentary seats granted to the recognized religious minorities, a provision maintained after the 1979 Iranian Revolution. There are 2 seats for Armenians and one for each other minority: Assyrians, Jews and Zoroastrians.
If you want to criticize a country for not letting religious minorities even have houses of worship (something that’s a clear and direct violation of Quranic principles) let alone be in the government, try Saudi Arabia.[/quote]
Doesn’t some council decide if a candidate is worthy, or is that just for the Fuhrer…er, 'scuse me, the President?
[quote]pat36 wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
lixy wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
The Muslim view is, I think, that women are evil and become tempters of men, unless they get hitched very early.
Hitler believed the same stuff and advocated early marriage, only his goal was to get rid of syphillis.
Nazis and Muslims actually have a lot in common.
Bollocks!
You clearly know nothing about Islam. Please substantiate your claims or shut the hell up.
Both groups want (or wanted) to kill people over what they claimed was ‘their land’. There’s the second similarity.
There are others. Shall we continue?
Hey good point! Yes, please continue.
[/quote]
Gays were killed or put in concentration camps in Nazi Germany. There are no gays in Iran, according to their fearless leader. So, the Nazis and Muslims do differ on this one. Or do they…
Wow, this is fun! There sure are a lot of parallels between these two groups. No wonder they hate America, the Middle East Muslims are the Nazis reborn.
[quote]lixy wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
Doesn’t some council decide if a candidate is worthy, or is that just for the Fuhrer…er, 'scuse me, the President?
Back off a sec’ doll. [/quote]
(1) Doll? WTF? You are now on the Suspicion List.
(2) If we were in Iran, you would not exist.
Doll…is this some sort of Newspeak that I’m unaware of, or is this Gayspeak? Men (normal) do not call each other ‘doll’.