A challenge about women and marriage in Islam

[Violet]

Wow so you mean you found data that says when girls are young attractive teenagers who have become sexually mature they are more likely to be raped or sexually assaulted, not at all surprising and nothing to do with the topic as usual, just add that to the pile of babble I have to go through when I read your posts.

I'm not sure if trolling... or just stupid.

You're arguing the horrors of oft-sexually less mature 9 year olds being abused, I observe that in a 'civilized' first-world nation: it is people from 12-34 who suffer the most of this, and that those 16-19 are of particularly significant risk.

It's illegal in the nation in question, should we not expect similar results of abuses in nations where women are considered a form of property? Note... not simply nine year olds: women in general.

I know about it because I was taught about it, but I probably didn't know very much about it at age 9.

And was such learning nearly so informative as your first experience with sex, financial abuse, etc?

I'm sure it's all well and good to be told poking it into a pussy is pleasurable... but if you haven't done it, well...

Add this then to the other types of abuses that 9 year olds are more vulnerable to than 16 year olds, their bodies are smaller and less developed and will typically need less drugs to get them addicted to drugs, controlling 9 year old children is much easier typically than controlling teenagers.

The only issue with physiological abuse is what the abuser is willing to do. If they're already willing to commit physiological abuses, and they find an avenue by which to procure their tools: the acquiring of additional tools is cake.

However, you're correct: less blood volume means more vulnerabilities to drugs This includes life-saving pharmaceuticals.

Yes you are correct, typically teenagers do want sex, 9 year olds typically don't want sex, exactly what I have been saying.

The very thing I'm arguing is, if we seek 'just and moral' laws: the dismissal of applying laws to typicality. The very fact that there are teenagers who do not want sex, and nine year olds who do... illustrates that age is not a perfect blanket of identicalness between those within their own group.

Of course, you were telling me that teenagers are less vulnerable than nine year olds. Simplifying this as "Oh I was right" by dismissing every strike against what you were saying... you're not, by chance, a marketing executive?

Babbling statistics that have no point as usual. These statistics are quite bad and they come from a place where child marriage is illegal and you can't legally have sex with children, do you propose we make it better by not calling it sexual abuse anymore and just calling it normal legal sex with children?

126,000 is... bad? The statistics come from the "U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, Administration for Children and Families. 1995 Child Maltreatment Survey. 1995." according to the site I got it from. If you have particular issue with US government statistics, I guess you would call the statistics bad *tinfoil hat*. Is there a reason these statistics are bad?

I already presented to you statistics of the areas where child marriage is legal (in particular: sub-saharan africa, middle-east, indian subcontinent), showing that they were horrible for ADULT WOMEN and LATE TEENAGERS across the board. What they do to children is not related specifically to children, but to what is already being done (that is to say: their being a child has nothing to do with the fact they are being abused). IF sex is legal with children, and sexual abuse is still not legal with children: what do you have against it?

What my last statistic set was for, was to demonstrate that even when these crimes are completely and utterly illegal in a first world country: they are still committed in a similar manner to where these crimes are also illegal (sexual abuse is illegal anywhere you go), but the third world countries are less adept with enforcing such. All that changes between them is 'what constitutes sexual abuse'... you've suggested that it is sexual abuse to have sex with a child, they disagree.

I suggest that you recognize that sexual abuse and sex with children are not necessarily one and the same... the latter can involve sexual abuse (just as sex with adult humans can involve sexual abuse), but inherently is not.

Can you isolate specifically what makes a person fuckable or marriageable? If we base our notions of fuckability and marriageablity off of experience as shown above: we cannot be fuckable until we are first fucked, and we cannot be marriageable until we are first married.

Repeated babble, and making it look like I implied things which I didn't, I didn't say you have to have experience of sex or marriage to know all about it and as for the rest of the questions I already have told you these things and you didn't listen the first time.

*coughs*

Less experience with people is a wash, since we're all at least somewhat inexperienced with people. If we weren't: we would never be surprised by what people do. We would also be significantly less prone to outrage. You're going to have less experience with sex until you have sex, and really: there's a point where you can have too much experience with sex... more of a wash than the last one. Can you isolate specifically what makes a person fuckable or marriageable? If we base our notions of fuckability and marriageablity off of experience as shown above: we cannot be fuckable until we are first fucked, and we cannot be marriageable until we are first married.

I never said you went so far as to say that experience is a bar by which anyone might be denied legal ability to marry or to have sex, but it was a part of your answer as to why 9-year olds should be barred having sex with <arbitrary>. Hence I took experience to it's conclusion, and removed it from the argument. If you would like to keep experience as a tag by which anyone be allowed <anything>... then they must contradict you to be allowed <anything>. Would you challenge this point? It must be on a non-logical basis if you do.

You've yet to answer me as to "Can you isolate specifically what makes a person fuckable or marriageable?"... so I'm inclined to say that no, you cannot isolate such to me, as you are incapable of doing so. How about you prove my inclination wrong?

If you can infact isolate the roots of fuckability and marriageability, and reconcile such with your valid belief that 9 year olds in general do not meet these observations, and write such down in form of a logical argument that follows to point of the formulation of a non-ageline law that performs a more accurate function of what you are attempting to relegate... you might actually get somewhere

English maths and science, IT and yes PE is a good one.

English: basic language skill. Mathematics and science are basic arithmetic skills (logic). What is IT? Information Technology? I wasn't aware they taught that in elementary school at all... and PE is irrelevant: exercise can be had anywhere if you have the ability to move.

Anything useful, then? Sounds like they would have better time usage collaborating with others to get real physical work (or theoretical work) done within their community.