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

You will find perverts and pedos in all forms of life.

The huge difference here is that Muhammed is the head of a religion, and it's followers are ordered to emulate him.

Muhammed was "The perfect man", and anything Big Mo. did is A-OK.


BTW, He also married his cousin, a practice still going on today.
You can get away with that for a generation or two, But not 1400 years.
Lots of birth defects.

 

So when was the last time a 7 year old was married, and how old was the boy.

 

The thread has descended into a trial of people from the past being trialled against today's laws. Mohammad, Delaware in the 1800's and past Royals will fall foul if judged by today's laws.

 

Saturday 3rd April 1880 at 12:45pm and the groom was 26 years old.

Apologies for the stupid reply to a stupid question.

 

Not really.
This still goes on in Islam today, and will never stop, because Muhammed did it.

 

Link

 

You just called Muhammad a whore. And the btw, Jesus then told her to go and sin no more. Islam presumes to judge and punish everyone. Hardly the conduct of a simple whore.

 

Precisely.

 

If there is a male equivalent , then he qualifies.

 

So you just made it up.

 

It goes on everywhere. Josef Fritzl started when she was 11, his own daughter. But he kept it low key, didn't write a book about it and didn't try to get married with a honeymoon.

I don't think he was a Muslim.

 

Oh dear.

Yes, I made it up because you started it. If you don't want stupid replies to stupid questions, then don't ask them.

 

I didn't start anything,
You asked me for a link, which was already posted, very plainly.

 

There is a huge difference when an obscure pedo commits a crime.
And when the respected leader of a huge cult does it.
and people follow his example.


You have in the messenger a beautiful pattern of conduct to follow...(Qur"an).

 

Shameless lie. Mohammed would easily pass the censors by today's laws, in much of the Muslim world. That is literally the entire point you are ostensibly trying to fight against. Lying isn't helping your case. In fact, you very clearly support the true point you are too squeamish to admit by highlighting this conttrast, if even on accident.

 

Why do Europeans need to be violent when they can just vote people out instead? What kind of violence do you imagine seeing in 15 years?

 

Well, if you get christians to focus judging a 7th century norm being adhered to by Islam's principle prophet by today's standards, they don't have time to focus on the pedophilia going on in their churches today.

 

If it was that commonplace why is anyone objecting to pointing out the truth about Mohamed the pedohile?

 

"Beliefs" are never to be respected. Only truth. And in order to discover truth we must always freely debate 'beliefs'.

 

Why is it 'hate speech' to point out that pedophilia is wrong, and that those who commit these acts are monsters? I see no other groups defending pedophilia except Muslims. Why is that?

 

This is no different from the worst of other religions who don't want their own history, beliefs or actions criticized.

 

Well, to be fair, many christians were not even offered the opportunity to focus on it, as it was hidden from view by a conspiracy of liars. Contrast that to open endorsement of child rape by the Muslim church in much of the Muslim world today. Doing so may help alleviate some of the apparent moral confusion and false equivalence implied in your post.

 

.

 

Seems child abuse and pedophilia is not restricted to any particular religion.

Its not false moral equivalence its a friggin' fact.

 

That wasn't what the court ruled about. They ruled that given that the woman was claiming to be an expert on Islam and holding classes, she was presenting ideas which she will have known were untrue and hence her intention was to show Islam was unworthy to join. She wanted to create bad feelings against Muslims and Islam. That was deemed as her true intention, not to teach. That fits into UK hate laws by being the intent to incite hate (or violence)

https://reason.com/blog/2018/10/25/european-court-womans-defamation-muhamma