Recently, I raised the issue of child marriage amongst Muslims, and I asked this "scientist" how old he believed Aisha was when she was married to Prophet Muhammad. He said "9".
We "know" this because it is mentioned in the hadith that the marriage was when she was 6, but the consummation took place when she was 9.
Then I said I do not believe that because ...
1) the Qur'an has laid down guidelines on how to determine if a girl is eligible to marry (not the onset of menses - but the ability to manage their own finances, the ability to give their own consent, and the ability to enter into a legal contract) AND
2) The prophet was a man of impeccable character and would not go against God's commandments.
How old Aisha was, really, is unknown, and conjecture/guesses at best, and frankly, irrelevant to Deen Islam, otherwise it would be mentioned in the Qur'an.
What happened next completely stunned me.
He - who believed the prophet married a 9-year old girl - accused ME of intending to impugn the Prophet's character.
This is irrational behaviour from anyone, more so one who says he is a scientist.
Because rationally, the people who actually do denigrate the Prophet are people who believe without question that he would 1) marry a child and 2) go against God's commandment.
Normally, I would brush it off, but irrational accusations like these are probably what killed Samuel Paty, who for all we know, had no intention of denigrating the Prophet, but sought to use a strong example to illustrate his lesson on free speech.
Nobody knows for sure, but some irrational person accused him of denigrating the prophet, and the next thing you know, another even more irrational person had killed the poor man.
Maybe it was too strong an example, but the Qur'an tells us to ignore these slights, say "peace" (25:63) and move away from the topic and person (7:180). This is the rational reaction. Had this happened, Samuel Paty would be alive.
Instead, irrationality took over and a human being is dead.
In real Islamic terms, this is akin to killing humanity itself.
5:32 ... whoever kills a human being, unless it be for murder or bloody crimes on the earth, it would be as if he killed all mankind...
One is tempted to think of himself, "I won't be that irrational" but that predicates being able to recognize irrationality in the first place in order not to commit excesses.
Again, normally, I would brush it off - but beliefs like this (Aisha marriage) is partly what prevents us from abolishing child marriage.
Yes to freedom. If it were me, I'd say Samuel Paty is a martyr of freedom.
Imam Chalgoumi has been for very long years now the voice of respect and tolerance, always standing up for republic laws and values.
He's also a stark defender of the Jewish community, fighting antisemitism that others try to revive. He fights for the spiritual side against the political ideology some want to impose on France.
In a country where thinkers are assassinated,
and writers are considered infidels and books are burnt,
in societies that refuse the other,
and force silence on mouths and thoughts forbidden,
and to question is a sin,
I must beg your pardon, would you permit me?
Would you permit me to bring up my children as I want,
and not to dictate on me your whims and orders?
Would you permit me to teach my children that the religion is first to God,
and not for religious leaders or scholars or people?
Would you permit me to teach my little one that religion is about good
manners, good behaviour, good conduct, honesty and truthfulness,
before I teach her with which foot to enter the bathroom
or with which hand she should eat
Muslims, if you are being told this, please challenge the person telling it to you - even common sense tells you that following anything blindly is stupid, and Islam does not teach you to be stupid.
Not to mention contradicting the Qur'an in 2:171 (The likeness of such blind followers is that of a herd of sheep which hear the shepherd’s call, but hear in it nothing more than a sound and a shout. Deaf, dumb, blind, for they do not use their reason), ...
... 17:36 (You shall not uphold that which you have no knowledge of), and exhortations of the Qur'an to use Reason in 2:44, 2:76, 3:65, 6:32, 7:169, 10:16, 11:51, 12:109, 21:10, 21:67, 23:80, 28:60, 36:62, 37:138.
The Qur'an tells us in a specific verse to use the Qur'an alone.
17:46 - We place shields around their minds, to prevent them from understanding it, and deafness in their ears. And when you preach your Lord, using the Qur'an alone, they run away in aversion.
Traditional Translation
17:46 - And We have placed coverings on their hearts and a heaviness in their ears lest they understand it, and when you mention your Lord alone in the Qur'an they turn their backs in aversion.
So which is it?
Is the Qur'an saying "Lord alone" or "Qur'an alone"?
To find out we need to look at the Arabic transliterations.
Adelina Lisao’s case, a young Indonesian domestic worker who passed away on the 11th February 2018 due to organ failure as a result of abuse and neglect, has caught the eyes of many across nations.
This petition demands for Ambika MA Shan to be charged separately under Section 304 of the PC which provides for deaths caused by culpable homicide not amounting to murder or those caused by negligence. The prosecution is looking to correct this grave miscarriage of justice.