To: robowombat
Judging someone who lived in a different culture over a thousand years ago by today's standards is pretty pathetic.
Hate it all you want but there were no statuatory rape laws back then.
10 posted on
10/04/2004 6:19:25 AM PDT by
ruiner
To: ruiner
LOL! You are a master of satire!
18 posted on
10/04/2004 6:28:05 AM PDT by
headsonpikes
(Spirit of '76 bttt!)
To: ruiner
Judging someone who lived in a different culture over a thousand years ago by today's standards is pretty pathetic. Hate it all you want but there were no statuatory rape laws back then.
If that's an attempt to justify the islamite babble, it's "pretty pathetic". For as much as three thousand years ago, it was "accepted" that a girl was not to be considered for wedlock nor to be given for marriage until she would "pass the flower of her age".
37 posted on
10/04/2004 6:42:02 AM PDT by
azhenfud
("He who is always looking up seldom finds others' lost change...")
To: ruiner
Hate it all you want but there were no statuatory rape laws back then. There has to be a codification in law for a thing to be wrong or immoral?
44 posted on
10/04/2004 6:51:35 AM PDT by
William Terrell
(Individuals can exist without government but government can't exist without individuals.)
To: ruiner
Judging someone who lived in a different culture over a thousand years ago by today's standards is pretty pathetic.
Who's judging, we're giving a statement of fact -- he consummated his marriage with an underage girl. Does that fit the definition of a paedo? Yes. Genghiz Khan committed genocide. That ain't a judgement, that's a fact
57 posted on
10/04/2004 7:40:41 AM PDT by
Cronos
(W2K4)
To: ruiner
Judging someone who lived in a different culture over a thousand years ago by today's standards is pretty pathetic. Why? Standards of right and wrong are eternal.
60 posted on
10/04/2004 7:48:03 AM PDT by
Aquinasfan
(Isaiah 22:22, Rev 3:7, Mat 16:19)
To: ruiner
"Judging someone who lived in a different culture over a thousand years ago by today's standards is pretty pathetic.
Hate it all you want but there were no statuatory rape laws back then."
You should add a /<sarcasm tag if you are not serious. You are a moron if you are serious. The child was prepubescent.
64 posted on
10/04/2004 8:01:02 AM PDT by
monday
To: ruiner
"hate it all you want but there were no statuatory rape laws back then"
Are you crazy? Obviously you have no female children and are not female yourself. You yourself must be a pervert to think that it's just A-OK to have sex with a nine year old child. Girls don't even usually have breast buds by then. You ought to be ashamed of your comment and ask God to forgive you right now
To: ruiner
Judging someone who lived in a different culture over a thousand years ago by today's standards is pretty pathetic. So why do Muslims hold up Mohammed today as the perfect role model? They are not judging his behavior by today's standards, but they are using his behavior to create modern Muslim standards of behavior.
71 posted on
10/04/2004 11:05:58 AM PDT by
xm177e2
(Stalinists, Maoists, Ba'athists, Pacifists: Why are they always on the same side?)
To: ruiner
"Hate it all you want..." Okay.
;-/
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson