Where ISLAM goes SEX CRIMES GROW!

 

https://youtu.be/B8lbCt_KYOA?si=ulNp0BAOAM7GMnoG

This video discusses the controversial topic of Islam and its alleged defense of pedophilia and child marriage, focusing on a viral clip of Sheikh Assim al-Hakeem defending the marriage of Prophet Muhammad to a minor. The speaker argues that these practices are fundamental to Islam, contrasting them with early Christian ethics.

Key points covered in the video include:

• Response to Sheikh Assim al-Hakeem's Defense (1:05): The speaker refutes the argument that the "good overwhelms the bad" in Islam and challenges the claim that historical standards justify child marriage.

• Historical Defense Refuted (4:33): The video asserts that historical claims made by Islamic defenders are false, providing examples of early Christian figures and Roman/Byzantine laws that condemned sexual exploitation, child marriage, and slavery long before Islam.

• Christian Law vs. Islamic Sexual Ethics (7:56): The speaker highlights how early Christianity introduced concepts like monogamy and condemned practices that are prevalent in Islamic contexts.

• Early Christian Criticism of Muhammad (11:16): The video presents quotes from early Christian figures who criticized Muhammad's actions and teachings, particularly his "private revelations" that seemed to justify actions considered unlawful.

• "It Was the Norm" Argument (15:32): The speaker dismisses the argument that Aisha did not complain because it was the norm, suggesting that such complaints would not have been preserved in Islamic texts and that the silence of victims is not consent.

• Disturbing Hadiths and Modern Practices (18:12): The video cites Hadiths about Aisha and draws parallels to modern instances of sexual slavery and child exploitation by groups like ISIS, arguing that these acts stem from core Islamic doctrine rather than being "bad apples."

• Selective Interpretation of Religion (24:01): The speaker criticizes the idea of selectively interpreting religious texts to fit modern sensibilities, arguing that it undermines the authority and coherence of the religion.