To avoid having your post removed &/or account banned for shitposting:
r/religiousfruitcake is about the absurd, fringe elements of organised religion. Posts about mundane beliefs and acts of worship (praying to God, believing in God, believing in afterlife, etc), are off topic.
We arent here to bash either specific religions or religion itself, because there are plenty of rational actors who happen to be religious. So if your post is "Christians are sTOoPid", or "Religion = dUmB", you're in the wrong sub and your post will probably be removed.
Dont use the title or body of your post to soapbox personal rhetoric about religion or any other subject.
Don't post videos or discussions of Fruitcakes who have been baited or antagonised. Social media excerpts must not involve any deliberate provocation / antagonism of Fruitcakes.
Dont post videos of physically violent personal attacks or any pics or videos containing gore
Satire, parodies, memes, videos, etc must be made by Fruitcakes, not by third parties about them. (exception for journalistic sources)
This information is on every post. Accounts that disregard it will be perma-banned. "I didn't get a warning" or "I didnt know" are not valid appeals. If in doubt, please read the full version of the rules
The guy is a Muslim Apologist known for justifying child-marriage and consummation. Yes in this tweet he is being sarcastic obviously, they cannot show signs of puberty. But the basis is still the same, you can consummate your wife when she show signs of puberty, no age limit.
But they say: "Well it's still not problem cuz only if the girl is able to and she consent"
Gosh, I wonder how that works
Islamic apologist is more accurate but it’s not a huge difference. “Apologetics” is the correct technical term for when religious groups argue about their faiths, particularly in defense of their faiths against common lines of attack.
Yes, obviously most Muslims are not pedos, and perhaps even privately disgusted by it, but in the context of apologetics they are obligated to defend it (with the exception of Muslims who reject the authority of Hadith). That’s actually even more fruitcakey. When you know it’s wrong but you have to say it’s right rather than admit your faith got something wrong.
First of all, yes you should. All magical thinking is intrinsically harmful, before you even get to the details of the imaginary things these whackadoos believe.
Second of all, being a credulous dingbat doesn't exempt you from basic morality. If you choose to be in a cult, and that cult says it's OK to fuck children, you still need to take a stand against that. "Well that was written a long time ago and we've reformed since then and don't permit child rape any more" is the bare minimum stance that any muslim needs to take to be a decent human being. Claiming that adults should be allowed to sexually abuse children because your imaginary friend says so is abhorrent behavior, and cannot be socially acceptable regardless of the context. No amount of willful mental illness excuses that kind of bullshit.
Anybody who claims "it's not abuse because religion" is a piece of shit. Society needs to treat them accordingly.
We're not against the group of people. We're against their barbaric beliefs. And it's not just a few, even the more progressive theists give legitimacy to the more extreme/regressive ones.
Wait what the hell is your point here???? I just said *"*AMuslim Apologist". If I say "There isawhite person that hate Islam" how do you process that information? Would you think that this mean that I said all white people hate Islam? So I don't know what's your problem with me saying *"*AMuslim Apologist".
Regarding bad person, well if defending a faith which in his case he believed that his faith allow child-marriage then yes that's a bad thing and he is a bad person for doing that. But that does not mean I say all teachings of Islam are bad or all Muslims are bad.
That's an odd thing to say, you shouldn't make an objection based on your assumption about someone. Under that logic I wonder how many comments would you object for making a non-controversial stance just incase if the person is a racist or a bigot? Apparently you only do that in my comment. Have you ask other comments in this post incase they're racist?
Sure some muslims are nice but islam is inherently bad. it's a stupid, ancient, homophobic, misogynistic ideology of hate started by a pedophile war criminal. It has no place in modern society.
I’d much rather a 45 year old divorcee that doesn’t want me to meet her kids but doesn’t mind leaving them at her mom’s to come over and throw down at my house. Best is it’s legal and morally sound.
Daniel even mentions this when he uses 'prepubescent'.
Daniel Haqiqatjou - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_El13YXwRDM&t=2753s "what the practice really is of marryyi...of an older man marrying, or or having sex with this 9 year old and or 10 year old pre-pubescent girl." Daniel H. claims it was a “tradition”. Then he makes clear it was for reproduction, so he is literally discussing impregnating 9 or 10 year olds at 46:05 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_El13YXwRDM&t=2765s “inthe vast majority of history life expectancy was relatively low infant mortality was considerably high and so therefore was necessary to use the extent of the fertility window for reproduction” and he falsely claims researchers like Rind think it is OK.
inthe vast majority of history life expectancy was relatively low infant mortality was considerably high and so therefore was necessary to use the extent of the fertility window for reproduction
I hate this claim so much. Its completely false bullshit made up by pedos to justify raping kids. In reality the average age for marriage and childbirth is in the low 20s for most if not all societies. There was no society in history where impregnating 12 year olds was common or acceptable
I certainly wouldn't be going around saying "my dick is tiny enough to consummate a relationship with a single celled organism." Not that guy though. He's proud of it.
To avoid having your post removed &/or account banned for shitposting:
r/religiousfruitcake is about the absurd, fringe elements of organised religion. Posts about mundane beliefs and acts of worship (praying to God, believing in God, believing in afterlife, etc), are off topic.
We arent here to bash either specific religions or religion itself, because there are plenty of rational actors who happen to be religious. So if your post is "Christians are sTOoPid", or "Religion = dUmB", you're in the wrong sub and your post will probably be removed.
Dont use the title or body of your post to soapbox personal rhetoric about religion or any other subject.
Don't post videos or discussions of Fruitcakes who have been baited or antagonised. Social media excerpts must not involve any deliberate provocation / antagonism of Fruitcakes.
Dont post videos of physically violent personal attacks or any pics or videos containing gore
Satire, parodies, memes, videos, etc must be made by Fruitcakes, not by third parties about them. (exception for journalistic sources)
This information is on every post. Accounts that disregard it will be perma-banned. "I didn't get a warning" or "I didnt know" are not valid appeals. If in doubt, please read the full version of the rules
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
The guy is a Muslim Apologist known for justifying child-marriage and consummation. Yes in this tweet he is being sarcastic obviously, they cannot show signs of puberty. But the basis is still the same, you can consummate your wife when she show signs of puberty, no age limit.
But they say:
"Well it's still not problem cuz only if the girl is able to and she consent"
Gosh, I wonder how that works
[deleted]
Muhammad was a pedophile
Islamic apologist is more accurate but it’s not a huge difference. “Apologetics” is the correct technical term for when religious groups argue about their faiths, particularly in defense of their faiths against common lines of attack.
Yes, obviously most Muslims are not pedos, and perhaps even privately disgusted by it, but in the context of apologetics they are obligated to defend it (with the exception of Muslims who reject the authority of Hadith). That’s actually even more fruitcakey. When you know it’s wrong but you have to say it’s right rather than admit your faith got something wrong.
What I mean by that is simply an Apologist Muslim, a person who defend/support Islam.
[deleted]
First of all, yes you should. All magical thinking is intrinsically harmful, before you even get to the details of the imaginary things these whackadoos believe.
Second of all, being a credulous dingbat doesn't exempt you from basic morality. If you choose to be in a cult, and that cult says it's OK to fuck children, you still need to take a stand against that. "Well that was written a long time ago and we've reformed since then and don't permit child rape any more" is the bare minimum stance that any muslim needs to take to be a decent human being. Claiming that adults should be allowed to sexually abuse children because your imaginary friend says so is abhorrent behavior, and cannot be socially acceptable regardless of the context. No amount of willful mental illness excuses that kind of bullshit.
Anybody who claims "it's not abuse because religion" is a piece of shit. Society needs to treat them accordingly.
[deleted]
We're not against the group of people. We're against their barbaric beliefs. And it's not just a few, even the more progressive theists give legitimacy to the more extreme/regressive ones.
Wait what the hell is your point here???? I just said *"*A Muslim Apologist". If I say "There is a white person that hate Islam" how do you process that information? Would you think that this mean that I said all white people hate Islam? So I don't know what's your problem with me saying *"*A Muslim Apologist".
Regarding bad person, well if defending a faith which in his case he believed that his faith allow child-marriage then yes that's a bad thing and he is a bad person for doing that. But that does not mean I say all teachings of Islam are bad or all Muslims are bad.
[deleted]
That's an odd thing to say, you shouldn't make an objection based on your assumption about someone. Under that logic I wonder how many comments would you object for making a non-controversial stance just incase if the person is a racist or a bigot? Apparently you only do that in my comment. Have you ask other comments in this post incase they're racist?
Sure some muslims are nice but islam is inherently bad. it's a stupid, ancient, homophobic, misogynistic ideology of hate started by a pedophile war criminal. It has no place in modern society.
https://preview.redd.it/tal6ko26jeag1.jpeg?width=700&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d26e46343fa7528b0ca9013d6ec3abb0a3436c9a
alright completely unrelated to anything here but whoever had the idea to put googly eyes on a falcon hood was a fucking mad genius
Everything to excuse Aisha.
I hate this world.
Proof that this religion is evil
وت ذا فک
I’d much rather a 45 year old divorcee that doesn’t want me to meet her kids but doesn’t mind leaving them at her mom’s to come over and throw down at my house. Best is it’s legal and morally sound.
A microscopic zygote that has gone through puberty? That's .... not a thing.
Not even a barely sentient single cell organism would want Daniel the greasy incel touching them.
If there's grass on the field, play ball!
Simply not true.
In Islam you can have intercourse with an underage wife if the guardian gives consent.
One of the simplest evidences is that Islam added 'pregnancy' to the lists of signs of puberty.
https://www.reddit.com/r/exmuslim2/comments/1maq7vl/pregnancy_is_a_sign_of_puberty_adulthood_in_islam/
There are indeed opinions within Islam that say consummation is permitted even if the girl doesn't give consent to it.
Daniel even mentions this when he uses 'prepubescent'.
Daniel Haqiqatjou - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_El13YXwRDM&t=2753s "what the practice really is of marryyi...of an older man marrying, or or having sex with this 9 year old and or 10 year old pre-pubescent girl." Daniel H. claims it was a “tradition”. Then he makes clear it was for reproduction, so he is literally discussing impregnating 9 or 10 year olds at 46:05 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_El13YXwRDM&t=2765s “inthe vast majority of history life expectancy was relatively low infant mortality was considerably high and so therefore was necessary to use the extent of the fertility window for reproduction” and he falsely claims researchers like Rind think it is OK.
I hate this claim so much. Its completely false bullshit made up by pedos to justify raping kids. In reality the average age for marriage and childbirth is in the low 20s for most if not all societies. There was no society in history where impregnating 12 year olds was common or acceptable
Is he.. Proud of it?
I certainly wouldn't be going around saying "my dick is tiny enough to consummate a relationship with a single celled organism." Not that guy though. He's proud of it.