A challenge about women and marriage in Islam

[Violet]

Also I do have the handicap in this debate of simply not being willing to type into my google search engine "do 9 year olds want sex"

Someone thinks that any of us have googled this shit? XD What's the point?

It's a ridiculous argument anyway, I can use statistics posted by Muslim Scholar though which actually defeat his own purpose as they say 62 percent of 10 year olds who had sex said they were persuaded by force or threats to have sex, the trend in the statistics is as they got older the less likely they were to have been coerced into it, therefore just as a guess I'd be willing to bet the percentage of 9 year olds who did have sex and were coerced was even higher than 62 percent.

And 38% of them had sex of their volition... perspective. Anyhow, maybe you can find the statistic? You see 10 and 11 as higher points than 12, but you do not see the data for 9, 13, 8, 14, 7, 15, 6, 16, 5, 17, 4, and 18. Calling it a 'trend' with only three data points?



Hey now... you might even be right. But... evidence where?

---

Age is relevant to the situation because 9 year olds are easier to intimidate and abuse.

Are they? I disagree. I see them as just as easy to intimidate and abuse as just about anyone else.

The statics shows by Muslim Scholar show the younger a child is the less likely they are to have sex but those who have sex are more likely to be persuaded into it by force or threats.

That would be probable, considering that mostly people willing to break the law already would be involved in this statistic.

But no, let's not question the circumstances and selection and sample size of the data in question, and just call it 'trending' with three points of data

And these are the statistics provided by the man who is supporting child marriage unbelievably.

Well, he's a troll, or more accurately a poe, as you've noticed. I may sometimes troll, but I am certainly neither of these things Seriously paulie: I want a *good* argument out of you here... and I've been waiting, for gods know how long

And yes having sex with an animal is still animal abuse whichever way you look at it.

How about from the way of the animal coming up to you and sticking it's dick in you of it's own volition? Or would it still be animal abuse, humans being animals of course?

Dogs fuck birds, cats fuck dogs, dogs fuck turtles, pigs fuck dogs, horses fuck cows... is it such a stretch to say that an animal might actually want sex and not care very much what species you are? I've made this point before: tie a female human girl down, naked, in doggystyle, with a breeding male dog... see what happens

Any volunteers yet?

[paulpablo]

And 38% of them had sex of their volition... perspective.

From a statistical perspective 38 is lower than 62.
62 is higher than 38.

The trend is very likely to carry on in that way due to the biology of humans, the more older you are the more likely you are to have gone through puberty and puberty is related to sex.

It is logically unlikely that you will gather statistics from a group of 9 10 11 and 12 year olds to find the 10 year olds were having less sex than the 11 year olds but the percentage of those who did were mostly not doing it willingly 11 year olds were having less sex than the 12 year olds half of which were willing but then later find out the 9 year olds were having more sex than the 10 year olds and more willingly.

[Violet]

And 38% of them had sex of their volition... perspective.

From a statistical perspective 38 is lower than 62.
62 is higher than 38.

And 50.1% is higher than 49.9%... struggling... to.... see... your... point.

The trend is very likely to carry on in that way due to the biology of humans, the more older you are the more likely you are to have gone through puberty and puberty is related to sex.

Well... if we keep pumping our little girls full of female cow hormones: what do you expect happens to them?

Yeah... puberty is related to sex. You know what else is related to sex? Pleasure Know what rather curious people might discover well before puberty? Masturbation, and 'playing with themselves' in general.

It is logically unlikely that you will gather statistics from a group of 9 10 11 and 12 year olds to find the 10 year olds were having less sex than the 11 year olds but the percentage of those who did were mostly not doing it willingly 11 year olds were having less sex than the 12 year olds half of which were willing but then later find out the 9 year olds were having more sex than the 10 year olds and more willingly.

On... what basis? Oh right, we're still working with three data points... and forming conclusions on what the other datapoints MUST look like without any data. I wonder what that makes us look like.

I haven't investigated his data, the data being irrelevant to my argument. I consider the whole thing a big old distraction from philosophical readability and not being hypocritical and stuff. It's really easy, and I'm dying... because you're not fucking doing it. So easy!

Challenge: form an argument which allows for what you are trying to do WITHOUT applying special pleading or arbitrariness into the argument.

[paulpablo]

From a statistical perspective 38 is lower than 62.
62 is higher than 38.

And 50.1% is higher than 49.9%... struggling... to.... see... your... point.

The trend is very likely to carry on in that way due to the biology of humans, the more older you are the more likely you are to have gone through puberty and puberty is related to sex.

Well... if we keep pumping our little girls full of female cow hormones: what do you expect happens to them?

Yeah... puberty is related to sex. You know what else is related to sex? Pleasure Know what rather curious people might discover well before puberty? Masturbation, and 'playing with themselves' in general.

It is logically unlikely that you will gather statistics from a group of 9 10 11 and 12 year olds to find the 10 year olds were having less sex than the 11 year olds but the percentage of those who did were mostly not doing it willingly 11 year olds were having less sex than the 12 year olds half of which were willing but then later find out the 9 year olds were having more sex than the 10 year olds and more willingly.

On... what basis? Oh right, we're still working with three data points... and forming conclusions on what the other datapoints MUST look like without any data. I wonder what that makes us look like.

I haven't investigated his data, the data being irrelevant to my argument. I consider the whole thing a big old distraction from philosophical readability and not being hypocritical and stuff. It's really easy, and I'm dying... because you're not fucking doing it. So easy!

Challenge: form an argument which allows for what you are trying to do WITHOUT applying special pleading or arbitrariness into the argument.

I'm arguing that 9 year olds shouldn't have sex it isn't exactly difficult. There's no pleading involved and I'm using the statistics of the person I'm arguing against.

Which is a better law for most 9 year olds, the one that allows them to legally get pregnant, beaten, distracted or totally brought out of education plus in realistic practical terms results in child abuse and forced marriages coerced by parents and so on.

Or a law which promotes not having sex with 9 year olds, good parenting education, no domestic abuse and so on, it's actually boring me how little effort I have to put into the argument, as I said I haven't even used my statistics and by the way yes I would say those statistics do result in 9 year olds wanting less sex than 10 year olds based on the information on those charts.

Guess how the majority of mammals on this earth came into being? By their parents having sex. Condoms split, contraception often causes medical problems so they aren't always advisable, abortions are often dangerous and basically it's just better for the 9 year old to remain not pregnant, call me old fashioned that's just how I see things.

And 50.1% is higher than 49.9%... struggling... to.... see... your... point.

My point is the majority vast vast majority of 10 year olds don't have sex, the majority that do, didn't want to and were persuaded by force or threats. You asked to see these statistics and they are provided to you by someone who is arguing the same point as you, now I paste them in front of you and you ask me what my point is?
Don't ask me for statistical evidence if you don't want to see it and refuse to see the point in it even if it is right in front of your nose.

[NoraBrimstone]

I just broke my face in an attempt to facepalm and headdesk at the same time.

[Violet]

I'm arguing that 9 year olds shouldn't have sex it isn't exactly difficult. There's no pleading involved and I'm using the statistics of the person I'm arguing against.

Okay... then I'm arguing that 31 year olds should have sex it isn't exactly difficult. There's no pleading involved and I'd use statistics, only the person I'm arguing against hasn't provided any.

Which is a better law for most 9 year olds, the one that allows them to legally get pregnant, beaten, distracted or totally brought out of education plus in realistic practical terms results in child abuse and forced marriages coerced by parents and so on.

Which is a better law for most 31 year olds, the one that allows them to legally get pregnant, beaten, distracted, or totally brought out of education plus in realistic practical terms results in domestic abuse and forced marriages coerced by sugar daddies and so on.

... Because I'm totally arguing for legal beatings and bringing peeps out of edumacation, right? RIGHT! I've only denied this straw man six times... are you really that dense?

Or a law which promotes not having sex with 9 year olds, good parenting education, no domestic abuse and so on, it's actually boring me how little effort I have to put into the argument, as I said I haven't even used my statistics and by the way yes I would say those statistics do result in 9 year olds wanting less sex than 10 year olds based on the information on those charts.

Or a law which promotes not having sex with 31 year olds, good adult education, no domestic abuse and so on, it's actually boring me how little effort I have to put into the argument (NO KIDDING!), as I said, I haven't even seen any statistic used by the opposition, and by the way yes I would say that shying away from statistical usage would result in some hilarious scenario where our charts alter the reality of the world.

Guess how the majority of mammals on this earth came into being? By their parents having sex. Condoms split, contraception often causes medical problems so they aren't always advisable, abortions are often dangerous and basically it's just better for the 9 year old to remain not pregnant, call me old fashioned that's just how I see things.

Guess how the majority of mammals on this earth cam-- oh I can't do this anymore. Seriously... this is too much.

Really... what is the point of this paragraph? Or... any of those preceding. You managed a kudos, so you must have made sense to someone.

My point is the majority vast vast majority of 10 year olds don't have sex, the majority that do, didn't want to and were persuaded by force or threats.

Oooh, look! He has a point. Let's read it! Oh... that was it. Well, that was lacking, given its ignorance of why a majority of 10 year olds don't have sex I believe I've told you this before? Yup.

You asked to see these statistics and they are provided to you by someone who is arguing the same point as you, now I paste them in front of you and you ask me what my point is?

Me and muslim scholar are not arguing the same point... I read them, and I thought they were pointless ESPECIALLY given that you have a grand total of three (3!) data points. I ask: why does one assume this data trends at all, let alone the direction of it's trending

Don't ask me for statistical evidence if you don't want to see it and refuse to see the point in it even if it is right in front of your nose.

I've asked you for it... and I've yet to see it. I'm not refusing to see your point, Buster Brown: I'm desperately looking for anything substantial in your point. And finding... nothing. I might as well make the point that the sky is blue... sure, it is... but: does it matter?

---

I just broke my face in an attempt to facepalm and headdesk at the same time.

Don't break it across a kitty on the way down... it'd be tragic to hurt a pussy cat

[paulpablo]

Which is a better law for most 31 year olds, the one that allows them to legally get pregnant, beaten, distracted, or totally brought out of education plus in realistic practical terms results in domestic abuse and forced marriages coerced by sugar daddies and so on.

The only part of this for a 31 year old I have a problem with is the being beaten part, if a 31 year old doesn't want education or wants to become pregnant I think that's totally fine. Or if they want to marry someone for their money or whatever.

I've only denied this straw man six times... are you really that dense?

I didn't say you were arguing for people being beaten, I'm staying on topic for the thread, I'm talking about what I'm arguing against.

I know the only thing you seem to be for is the portion of the argument that allows 9 year olds to have sex but the thread isn't all about you, it's about Islam and the quran and part of being married according to the quran means your husband is allowed to beat you if he fears arrogance from you and has already warned you verbally and banished you from the bedroom as a 2nd warning, it's not strawman.

Okay... then I'm arguing that 31 year olds should have sex it isn't exactly difficult.

Go on start a separate thread and do it then, I'll debate with you on that thread too that 31 year olds should be legally allowed to have sex if they wish. As opposed to 9 year olds who shouldn't.

---

I've asked you for it... and I've yet to see it. I'm not refusing to see your point, Buster Brown: I'm desperately looking for anything substantial in your point. And finding... nothing.

I was pointing out that the legalization of 9 year olds and 10 year olds being allowed to marry would be more of a benefit to pedophiles than to 9 or 10 year olds who want to have sex with 9 or 10 year olds, the statistics are substantial to the argument because they show as I suspected that most 10 year olds don't have sex, the majority that do were coerced, if you don't see a substantial point in that then that's your problem.
I'll add again those statistics provided by Muslim Scholar the man in favor of allowing adults to marry 9 and/or 10 year olds.

[Violet]

The only part of this for a 31 year old I have a problem with is the being beaten part, if a 31 year old doesn't want education or wants to become pregnant I think that's totally fine. Or if they want to marry someone for their money or whatever.

Because being pregnant suddenly isn't a problem for a 31 year old woman? Everything hangs in the balance, and here comes a disruption.

You THINK that's totally fine? It's almost as if you're learning... you may yet grasp upon the idea. Subjectivity's gonna hit you like a ton of bricks. Or a pound of feathers.

I didn't say you were arguing for people being beaten, I'm staying on topic for the thread, I'm talking about what I'm arguing against.

And I'm not arguing what you're arguing against: Abuse is abuse, regardless of the age of the person being abused, so kindly do not quote my statements and respond to them as though I am.

But then, I also am arguing what you're arguing against: that it's totally fine for a nine year old to get married or have sex with someone of any age from 5 to 95... as long as no party within said relationship is being abused

I know the only thing you seem to be for is the portion of the argument that allows 9 year olds to have sex but the thread isn't all about you, it's about Islam and the quran and part of being married according to the quran means your husband is allowed to beat you if he fears arrogance from you and has already warned you verbally and banished you from the bedroom as a 2nd warning, it's not strawman.

Social protocol and logic class time, please do pay attention.

You create sham arguments that you set up to be defeated, without addressing my arguments, and say you've addressed them. Learning experience: what you've created is a man of straw, and he doesn't have a brain. Thank heavens, for you set him aflame enough to make even the most basic of nervous systems scream bloody murder.

When someone quotes another person and responds to the quote... one is expected to be responding to the person's quote. Example, say I quote Tiberius on capitalism, but I'm REALLY responding to RevvieJ: Tiberius will be left believing I have neither read his argument, nor have any idea why I'm going on about the syndicalist content of "his" posts.

So, now that you've learned to not make straw men: impress me... illustrate to me *LOGICALLY*, and without a single arbitration or case of special pleading: how marrying a 9 year old is not acceptable... yet marrying a 50 year old is acceptable.

Go on start a separate thread and do it then, I'll debate with you on that thread too that 31 year olds should be legally allowed to have sex if they wish. As opposed to 9 year olds who shouldn't.

You and germans both... why should I put forth the effort to "debate" you when you've yet to show me a capacity to debate?

Do you have a morbid fascination with special pleading, or are your really too dumb to realize what you're doing?

I was pointing out that the legalization of 9 year olds and 10 year olds being allowed to marry would be more of a benefit to pedophiles than to 9 or 10 year olds who want to have sex with 9 or 10 year olds, the statistics are substantial to the argument because they show as I suspected that most 10 year olds don't have sex, the majority that do were coerced, if you don't see a substantial point in that then that's your problem.

Yet to adress the cultural separation of boys and girls, check...
Yet to adress the earlier ages at which LGB people have their first sexual experience, check...
Yet to adress the absence of more than 3 data points, check...
Yet to adress the concern of where these statistics came from, check...
Yet to adress the sample size of these statistics, check...
Yet to adress the motive of the group collecting the data, check...
Yet to adress the application of criminal social theory (once you break one law, what's your justification for not breaking another?)
Yet to make a logical argument
Yet to correctly interpret statistics (4/10ths of a population is a minority, sure... a very large one)
Yet to explain how legalizing marriage with 9 year olds and adults is a benefit to abusive pedophiles (I swear, it's like you want me to illustrate the 4 primary groups/motivators for pedophilia... maybe you don't know? 0.o)

But worst of all... you're blindly trusting the data given to you by Muslim Scholar, a dedicated poe and troll, and then blindly attributing this data to anyone who argues for the legalization of child marriage

I'll add again those statistics provided by Muslim Scholar the man in favor of allowing adults to marry 9 and/or 10 year olds.

I'll add again that I believe these to be wholly irrelevant to the philosophical concerns of the basic questions. Who gives a shit whether they are 9, 4, 3242, 1, freshly born, or 18: what are the primary factors that make a person 'marriageable' or 'fuckable'?

[paulpablo]

[Violet]