Calling Prophet Muhammad a pedophile does not fall within freedom of speech: European court

No this is not about stating any facts. This is about deliberate hate speech as is evidence from how it is portrayed in forums. I am sure Muslims have not been able to marry until someone reaches puberty so that makes it highly unlikely she was only 6 as some have said. Now it was the European/American societies who had children being married as young as 4 in much later days.
https://discover-the-truth.com/2013/09/09/age-of-consent-in-european-american-history/

 

There are a lot of US states that do not have a minimum age to marry with parents consent. Some have allowed girls as young as 10

 

So now, you want to outlaw an emotiion ? And no, it's not hate, it's criticism. People should have the right to like or dislike any religion. You can hate Islam, as long as you don't call violence against muslims.
That show how dictatorial the left and muslims are, they want to force by law people to appreciate Islam.

The point is not muslims, it's their prophet Muhammed.
And you're anyway wrong, child marriage exist, no only in islamic countries, but they're particulary problematic.



https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/09/these-are-the-countries-where-child-marriage-is-legal/

https://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/30/iraq-child-marriage-law-vote_n_5234828.html
The law was rejected.

It's not "some", that's a sahih bukhari or muslim hadith. I don't have the time to find it back right now, maybe later.

The point is not the laws of some european or american societies.

How do we call someone who got sexual intercourse with a 9YO ? A paedophile. The fact that you're a religious leader don't change it, neither the fact it sadden people.

 

It is hate speech. It is pretty much impossible that she was so young for a start because as I said you always had to reach puberty before you got married in Islam.

The West had much younger age for marriage so concentrating on an almost certainly wrong age and calling him a paedophile while ignoring the much younger age your own ancestors were marrying at clearly is hate speech. - never mind the way it is written as being obviously hate speech.

 

Let's go on the muslim website Sunnah.com.
A'isha (Allah be pleased with her) reported that Allah's Apostle (ﷺ) married her when she was six years old, and he (the Holy Prophet) took her to his house when she was nine, and when he (the Holy Prophet) died she was eighteen years old
So, maybe you're right, maybe the third most important source about Islam after the Quran and Sahih Bukhari, used by thousands of sunni scholars is right.
But, I'm got this straight from a muslim website, from a holy muslim source, Muhammed married Aisha when she was six, and had sexual intercourse or "took her to his house".

Yes, "had". Again, you'r trying to change the topic because :
1) The fact that some other people commit or commited horrible deeds doesn't justify to commit it.
2) Nobody consider a random european kind died 800 years ago as a perfect model.
2) That's irrelevant to the fact that someone having sex with an underage girl is a paedophile, and saying that isn't hate or love or anything, it's just stating a fact. Maybe you know better than the most holy sources of Islam.

And still, people have the right to dislike Islam and not appreciate either this religion or its prophet, like people had all the right they wanted to dislike christianity in a lot of european countries (however Ireland and Poland, have/had laws against blasphemy)L.

The "hate speech" excuse is just an agenda for a dictatorial behaviour to remove people their right to speak freely and dislike or like things freely.
This woman was not calling for violence, and so she is punished in a dictatorial way.

 

Time to update the Meme's.

 

Outlawing an opinion is fascism, authoritarian etc. I hate Islamic idealogy. I have no respect for Mohammed. I see Allah as a false God. I have no respect for Islamic idealogy. I have the inherent right to have that opinion without threat of prosecution from government.

I can have that opinion while at the same time dealing with those that mock Jesus, calls Chritianity a cult and makes dispicable "art" of a figure of Jesus upside down in a bottle of urine. Free speech is either loved or not.

 

You're hurting feelings, you monster, the feelings of the tolerant left who can't tolerate and want to outlaws opinions they don't like.

And nobody was condemned the so called "piss christ". Blaspheme christianity and a man might destroy your photography with a hammer (which isn't acceptable), blaspheme Islam, and you end as a swiss cheese.

 

The interesting thing is...godless "progressives" support Islamic fascism not having a clue they are not going to have their own freedoms when the time is ripe. Self destructive.......

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_marriage_in_the_United_States

Interesting, is this so America can accommodate loads of Muslims?

 

Yes they can, and so can anyone else, anywhere at anytime, and they should. What an absurd thing to say. And they certainly should not be banned by law from doing so. Your words are frightening on a level you clearly do not grasp.

 

No it was actually a lot worse, up until I think the early 20th century some states it was 9

 

So? I hate Mohammed,and you should, too. Some hate speed is good. I hate Hitler. Uh oh, that was hate speech.

And -- just so we are all clear -- that is speech. And it is either free, or it is not.

 

It is a sad fact that freedom of speech has been eroded in Europe it started with the Jews and Holocaust denial, now they scream for Kosher and Halal produce and take offence at anything. They want religious schools and the right to mutilate their children. The sooner we get these three scummy Abrahamic faiths educated out of europe and resigned to the history books the better. Causing offence to any religion, tough, get your pathetic gods to deal with it and leave secular law alone.

 

You know all this happened many 100s of years ago. History is our interpretation of others interpretation of what may or not have happened in an uncivilised world of superstitios people.
Customs were different, life expectancy was different ,medical and science knowledge were a mixture of guesses and superstition.

Many writings in all religions have been in the custodial care of some very strange people.

The Catholic Church has altered some texts especially those around Christmas.

Israel uses a history that is based on stories, songs and poems.

Unfortunately there were no recording devices and most could not read or write. History was written by hearsay and interpretation.

To use the hook that as Mohamad was a paedophile so are his followers. The founder of the AOG (Assemblies Of God) was a paedophile.

If however you want to judge Islam on the Koran, it is very specific about age. It is also very specific about other things your side get wrong.

As we have just seen the bomber in the US appears to be nothing more than a Trump fanatic, I mean look at the van.

There are a small number of Trump supporters who would have been cheering him on. But he or they do not represent ALL Trump supporters. ... Do they?

 

I'll just judge it by its actions and horrible ideas, same as the evil pedophile Mohammed.

And we are talking about current events, not history. If someone cannot protest a current transgression because their 8th great uncle, 9 times removed once did something terrible...then nobody can ever protest anything, now can they? I reject such spineless equivocation.

 

Iradicating religion has been tried and failed already. An irreligious nation is too weak to stand except if it too turns into a totaltaian system. Otherwise a stronger religious ideology will be transplanted.

Best course would be to look at history...

 

Nope, show me a country where religion was EDUCATED out of existence? I am not for forcing religions out, just educate it out slowly over time. But the point of this thread is does free speech trump the right of the religious or any other minority having their feelings hurt. Apparently because I argue Israel is a racist state I am antisemitic! All those tender sensibilities!

 

Tbh, free speech in the UK exists like being on a forum. There are ways of putting your case/point across without receiving an infraction/ban !!

Due to the 1st Amendment, Americans can be and are more brash, slanderous etc.. and so believe free speech doesn't exist anywhere else.

 

Just to clarify the law it's now illegal to call Muhammed a paedophile but it's still OK to say he raped a 9 year old right?

 

What a horrible and morally bereft comparison. You just compared a ban from placing content on a privately owned website to the force of law as a consequence to a spoken word. For shame.

Followed up by a cheap characterization designed only to sidestep the actual arguments as to why this ban is, in fact, a violation of free speech and free thought.

 

Give it time...the appeasers are emboldened, now.

 

Either everything is ok to say or none of it is. There is no inbetween!

I think you get which side I fall on.

 

Arrogance is assuming that we are better and more educated then the civilizations before us, Rome, Greece, western civilization in general. You think those people didn't wonder if Zeus really existed ?? They weren't educated?

Rationally, looking at the evidence of history , one has to assume that worshiping something higher then themselves is key for a society to thrive and achieve to a sustainable level.

Evidence is out there.

You might be antisemetic...if you hold more hatred towards Israel and none towards the the racist countries around it that don't allow Jews in at all. But that's your opinion and I have to deal with it.

 

Thank you for that baloney.