Is this better Gandalf?

Muhammed invented love (within marriage), but couldn't bring himself to utter the word in case they thought he was acting gay, like Jesus. Other cultures up until that time never made the connection between love and marriage, but Muhammed's "silent revolution" changed all that with a mere nudge and a wink. Gandalf knows what he was talking about, even if other Muslims never cottoned on.

Muhammed introduced bold new legislation outlawing spousal rape and the rape of sex slaves and women caught in battle. Again, he didn't tell his followers about it in case they refused to slaughter Jews and Pagans for him - as taking the women home was part of the deal. After Muhammed's 12 wives and many sex slaves, and up to four wives plus sex slaves for other leaders and wealthy men, there were not many women left, so capturing women in battle was a strong incentive to get poor and young Muslims men off to war.

Curiously, Muhammed could not bring himself to utter the word rape either. The one time he did punish someone for rape in the conventional context, he used the word intercourse and gave the same punishment as unlawful intercourse.

Instead of telling Muslims about the ban on rape, Muhammed went for a "phased approach":

Phase 1) Set the ground rules: sex is a man's right. Sex is a woman's obligation. Do not beat your wives "excessively" like you beat your sex slaves, or they will be permitted to beat you in return. Cover them up, and do not leave bruises that will be visible in public. Never ask a man why he beats his wife, as he is obviously a poor communicator.

Phase 2) A 21st century wizard attempts to convince non-Muslims (who have already adopted the standard of their own volition) that Islam has the same standards. After this challenge is completed, move on to the next phase.

Phase 3) Convince Muslims that Islam bans the rape of wives, sex slaves, women caught in battle etc.

Phase 5) Actually change the law and punish rapists.

You may have noticed I left out phase 4. This is not to trick anyone, but an Islamic principle of never presenting information in the obvious order. Phase 4 is the wholesale abandonment of Islamic law by Muslims.

Muhammed also wanted to stop arranged marraiges. Again, he forgot to mention it.

After beheading 800 Jews, Muhammed looked over the women and children who were left behind. He fell madly in love with the best looking one and they lived happily ever after. Their marriage brought peace between Muslims and Jews. Muhammed also fell in love with his neighbour's six year old daughter. She was already betrothed to another man, but Muhammed negotiated the annulment of that contract. The child bride's father also became Muhammed's right hand man.

Everything Muhammed said should be interpreted however you feel like. You may choose between two opposite but non-contradictory principles in making your interpretation:

* Do not forbid what Allah has permitted for you. Everything is legal, unless specifically forbidden.
* Interpret any ruling or precedent in the broadest possible sense, discarding common sense and context. Project 21st century standards and meanings (or whatever standards you think the audience wants to hear) onto events that happened 1400 years ago.

freediver wrote on Sep 6^th, 2013 at 12:42pm:


You mean Rodinson? Sounds like an Arab name does it? An eyewitness account you think?

Got any primary sources? Anyone could write anything 1400 years after a supposed event. You have less credibility than a Murdoch paper.

Shall we start taking Die Sturmer as an authoritative text on Jewish history?


freediver wrote on Sep 6^th, 2013 at 12:42pm:


Yes, according to the most authoritative sources, Rayhana was a freed prisoner who accepted a marriage proposal from Prophet Muhammed.

So the "authoritative sources" disagree on whether Muhammed took a specific slave as his own personal concubine, and to you this proves that Islam forbids sex with slaves?

freediver wrote on Sep 8^th, 2013 at 9:47am:


Lol excuse me? - I'M trying to prove...??

Sorry to break it to you, but its you who's trying to prove something - namely:

freediver wrote on Sep 6^th, 2013 at 8:20am:


Do you have any shred of evidence to substantiate this?

freediver wrote on Sep 8^th, 2013 at 7:49pm:


Where? The Rodinson reference that had nothing whatsoever to do with what Muhammad did with his slaves?

freediver wrote on Sep 8^th, 2013 at 7:49pm:


They are two separate matters. For now I am interested in the former. Please stop stalling FD - show me the evidence - actual relevant evidence - that Muhammad had sex with ANY of his slaves.

Thanks Baron. Does that count as evidence Gandalf, or are we 'interpreting' it incorrectly? Perhaps you can find another slave girl Muhammed did not have sex with, and interpret that as a general ban on the practice?

Doesn't it seem a bit silly to be arguing over whether Muhammed had sex with a particular slave girl while you insist that Islam forbids it in general?

Any idea how many slaves Muhammed had sex with?

And how many of them had their previous husband's head chopped off by Muhammed?