I wouldn’t be surprised if somebody does end up pwning them with a ransomware out of spite.

Happy cakeday

I came for the answers, stayed for the MEMS

If you fill both fields the output in the terminal is file|this is some text|

Wouldn’t it be easy to get them using awk by defining | as a field separator?

I don’t understand… she has the right in islamic law to ask for divorce which she would have granted by a judge seeing the abuse.

I think it is not possible in Christian law for a woman to ask for divorce except in the case of adultry, but Islamic law is clear about cases where the husband is abusive or doesn’t take his responsibilities. I just don’t get how people still consider Iran as a country that upholds Islamic law, unless they don’t know said law.

Daytime cereals: cereals then milk

Nighttime cereals (stealth mode): milk then cereals

Curious how damaged they are.

One must have serious damage and no morals to do such thing

I’m stupid :)

I was wondering if you were like born again christian or something and that you considered another importabt date as being your second birth day.

What do you mean by your “first” birthday?

Like yeah, it’s somewhat stupid that she thought 4chan has accounts

* cough tripfags cough *

And my axe.

Thank you for the kind words and I hope you can soon become a happy grapefruit.

No, I still need to learn and hope there are people more educated than in me in the matter making the community here alive.

Same for r/Islam. The couple I found here are abandoned.

Look, you’re being downvoted already, and so will I :)

You are not backing any of your emotional claims and just keep repeating how cruel, abhorrent and “bad” what things that differ from what you perceive as “right” are (also slurs). Also calm down with the hate speech (“summarily executed”).

Calm down (if this not just a rhetoric you are using since you know you have no logical ground) and use your brain.

You missed the whole point that whatever morality you are holding is subjective. If you accept yours as valid, it means you cannot disagree with whatever morality others may have because they followed the same process as you to have theirs since it is subjective to them and their context. If you disagree with your views being subjective, you are invited to demonstrate how they are objective.

You postulate that a 9 year old is not an adult. Today I agree with you. Kids spend a lot of time at schools, watch cartoons, play games etc. So by the age of 9 they have no experience of the world and cannot be responsible of a household. At the time however things were completely different, they were directly confronted to life, had responsibility caring for their brothers and sisters and working. You can still find pictures of 3 year old working in the US from the late 90s.

They matured faster then compared to current days.

The question is at what age do we reach adulthood? Even in current days, with children living in somewhat comparable conditions, many disagree. Each country decides what is the legal age, which is different from its neighbours (and even differs within the country, eg. the US) but that is what each society decided. You claim there is a universal and atemporal age? The world and history disagrees with you. So at that time and in that society they decided the rule was to reach puberty. You don’t like it? It’s normal, it’s subjective.

Just a note: Islam doesn’t fix the age of consent but says the norm of the society should be followed. Which means the condition of reaching puberty cannot be applied wholesale today, and the local customs should be followed.

So how can we objectively judge societies from 14 centuries ago?

This question was directed to you and you evaded it.

So women aren’t allowed to preach

False, they can amongst women and only of necessary if men are around. You might bicker about this but this is normal since you are not familiar with the concept of حياء (there isn’t a word for it in English and gets mistranslated as shyness) and the respect of women.

aren’t allowed to own land

False, Islam came and changed that. They can inherit properties instead of being inherited themselves. And whatever women possess, whatever money they earn (of course they can work) is solely theirs and the husband has no right whatsoever on it. She can come from a rich family, the husband still has to provide for her and the house. Of course both can agree to share however they see fit, it’s up to them but she had every right to just keep her money.

aren’t allowed to admonish their [civilified] husbands

They can and they can even ask a judge and get divorce.

Who wrote the book?

Wrong answer. You can say “I don’t know” if you don’t know.

Any and all slavery is abhorrent and cruel.

Not true for all. Islam forbade taking free people as servants, exception for prisoners of war since there was no prison system. Also in many occasions pushed to free slaves, for the expiation of sins for example. Islam put the framework so that in the end many of those who had servants when Islam came had none over time. People bought some in order to free them: a notable example is Bibal ibn Rabbah, an Ethiopian slave bought to be freed by Abu Bakr (the 1st Caliph); he later became the treasurer of the state.

The research was peer reviewed. They should have included smarter people like you :)

Ok, there is a lot to unpack. Let’s discuss each point :)

You’re putting a lot of stock in the words of a pedophile and expecting me to do the same.

You must be referring to Aisha. How is he a paedophile? This is known as a fallacy of presentism: judging something that happened at a different time using current day standards disregarding the context.

Some sources say they were bethrothed when she was at the age of 6, others say 7. They then consummated the marriage when she was 9 when she reached puberty as was custom at the time. A time where a 10 year-old boy could inherit his father and become the head of the house. In a society where there was only 2 categories: kids and adults, adulthood being reached at puberty. At a time where the average life expectancy was around 27 against around 80 in current western countries. So now you get the context.

No body at the time used this argument because it was just the way society was. It is illogical to judge a distant society with the arbitrary norms of nowadays. There is no consensus amongst western countries about the legal age of marriage or of consent. There is even divergence within the US. It even changes in the span of half a century, in these countries, from 12 to 16. So how can we objectively judge societies from 14 centuries ago?

Where is the verse that says women can admonish, withold sex and beat their disobedient husbands?

The premise of this question is false. It implies that there should be a symmetry for there to be equality, otherwise one side is considered less than the other. Islam’s view is coherent with the fact that both man and woman are different physically and psychologically different. It gives to each his role within the society and family at a smaller scale. None is considered less than the other.

It doesn’t exist because the goat fuckers who wrote that vile book viewed women as property.

Who wrote the book? (Also, language?)

Cruel? There are guidelines for slavery in all Abrahamic religions.

Not the same slavery as what happened in America, but yes, having servants was widespread at the time and the genetic guideline is free them.

Superstitious and ignorant? Believing in a magical sky fairy. Enough said.

Are you implying you have evidence God does not exist?

And I take it you already read the explanation of the Prophet (pbuh) of that verse, meaning as a light flick with a pen, and not putting your own understanding of the translated verse. How violent!

Also that you are fully aware of the setting in which the apostasy laws are applicable (I will not help you with that, you should know).

because they are all rooted in cruelty, superstition and ignorance. I am not discussing other religions, Islam is the topic here.

Could you objectively demonstrate how it is cruel? How is Islam superstitious? And finally how is it rooted in ignorance?

Justin L. Barrett (born 1971) is an American experimental psychologist, Founder and President of Blueprint 1543, a nonprofit organization. He formerly was the Director of the Thrive Center for Human Development in Pasadena, California, Thrive Professor of Developmental Science, and Professor of Psychology at Fuller Graduate School of Psychology. He previously was a senior researcher and director of the Centre for Anthropology and Mind at the Institute for Cognitive and Evolutionary Anthropology at the University of Oxford.

Sorry you feel he is not sciency enough.

You talk as if you have read the research and understood the experiments he did over 3 years in numerous mainly non-religious countries on children who were not in contact with a religious discourse. The conclusion is that they innately inclined towards believing in a higher being. Which means that NO, children are not born atheists.

Which part of the research do you disagree with? I’m eager to read your paper and assess your qualifications.

Science disagrees with you:

Summarising scientific experiments conducted with children across the globe, Professor Barrett illustrates the ways human beings have come to develop complex belief systems about God’s omniscience, the afterlife, and the immortality of deities. He shows how the science of childhood religiosity reveals, across humanity, a “Natural Religion,” the organization of those beliefs that humans gravitate to organically, and how it underlies all of the major world religions, uniting them under one common source.

https://www.harvard.com/book/born_believers_the_science_of_childrens_religious_belief/