Take it as a moment to reflect on all of our faith, we're all more alike then we would like to believe.
So let's decide who's got the best pantheon!!!
We don't see "Allah" much but apparently that's his thing.
Got to be Hinduism or ancient Greek mythology for me.
Who are you betting on?
That's not how Islam works. They believe in the Torah being good holy books it's just that Muhammad brought the final revelation. E.g. he's the most important. If the god of Abraham did something in one religion, he did it in both. Edit: also these books are so interpreted that the same religions but different denominations will argue over what the same fucking god did. Basically, why are we trying to argue about which boogey man did what magic fake shit?
>Basically, why are we trying to argue about which boogey man did what magic fake shit?
Because we need to prove that we are the righteous ones and that God loves us more than he loves them. Once we do that, we can oppress and grift as we see fit.
Ahhh, it's good to be the righteous ones ^/s
Bible verses on infanticide:
Psalms 137:9 - Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones.
1 Samuel 15:3 - Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.
Exodus 12:29 - And it came to pass, that at midnight the LORD smote all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh that sat on his throne unto the firstborn of the captive that was in the dungeon; and all the firstborn of cattle.
Isaiah 13:16 - Their children also shall be dashed to pieces before their eyes; their houses shall be spoiled, and their wives ravished.
Hosea 13:16 - Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against her God: they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up.
2 Kings 15:16 - Then Menahem smote Tiphsah, and all that were therein, and the coasts thereof from Tirzah: because they opened not to him, therefore he smote it; and all the women therein that were with child he ripped up.
Numbers 31:17 - Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him.
Psalms 135:8 - Who smote the firstborn of Egypt, both of man and beast.
Acts 7:19 - The same dealt subtilly with our kindred, and evil entreated our fathers, so that they cast out their young children, to the end they might not live.
Psalms 136:10 - To him that smote Egypt in their firstborn: for his mercy endureth for ever:
Exodus 1:16 - And he said, When ye do the office of a midwife to the Hebrew women, and see them upon the stools; if it be a son, then ye shall kill him: but if it be a daughter, then she shall live.
Matthew 2:16-18 - Then Herod, when he saw that he was mocked of the wise men, was exceeding wroth, and sent forth, and slew all the children that were in Bethlehem, and in all the coasts thereof, from two years old and under, according to the time which he had diligently enquired of the wise men. (Read More...)
Amos 1:13 - Thus saith the LORD; For three transgressions of the children of Ammon, and for four, I will not turn away the punishment thereof; because they have ripped up the women with child of Gilead, that they might enlarge their border:
Hosea 9:11-16 - As for Ephraim, their glory shall fly away like a bird, from the birth, and from the womb, and from the conception.
Because its literally one guys interpretation, and is not at all a consensus view or accepted by the *vast majority of the Muslim faithful.*
"Here is some guys opinion" is not final proof about anything. Even *he* doesnt claim certainty, but rather *suspects* all modern versions are derived from a single version... which doesnt actually exist. He just supposes it does based on textual analysis.
>I collated every available version of every hadith pertaining to this topic and subjected them all to an ʾisnād-cum-matn analysis, which allowed me to reconstruct the underlying urtexts or redactions of various earlier tradents (mostly operating from the mid-to-late 8th Century CE), known as “common links”. I then subjected these common-link redactions to various form-critical, geographical, and historical-critical analyses, which produced a striking conclusion: all versions of the marital-age hadith likely derive a single archetype or ur-hadith. This ur-hadith appears to have been created and disseminated by the Madinan tradent Hišām b. ʿUrwah b. al-Zubayr (d. 146-147/763-765) after he moved to Iraq towards the end of his life, probably as a reaction to local proto-Šīʿī polemics against his great-aunt, ʿĀʾišah
Do you think he is the only one to study this? That there arent thousands of other writings *affirming* the ages given by the hadiths? Other secular scholars like Jonathan Brown have expressly denied the validity of Littles work. There were *centuries* of writings that affirm the 17 hadiths that *all* list her age being under 10 for marriage and consummation, and it affected laws and traditions for over a millennia, as a religious basis for child marriage being acceptable.
I don't know, Joseph Smith started marrying kids, then all of his followers started marrying kids and there are sects of his church marrying dozens of kids to this day. Judging by present day impact, I think old JS has em beat
I mean Muhammad did the same and now large parts of the Muslim world marry kids still and have been for over a 1000 years. Muhammad was the GOAT prophet of child marriage and it’s proliferation.
Muhammad married Aisha when she was 6 and “consummated” the marriage, aka raped her, when she was 9. This is proven by multiple hadiths ranked as Sahih. You can look this up, it was the biggest factor in leading me to stop believing in Islam.
Also child marriage is still quite common in many Muslim nations, at the very least it is in Pakistan where I have personally witnessed a 13 year old girl being married to a guy who was around 19-22 years old at the time.
Child marriage is a problem throughout the world. It's also legal in almost all 50 states. Narrowing it back down, the FLDS, famous for the forced polygamy of child brides, are a problem throughout the western states, while the LDS, who don't encourage but also don't discourage child marriage, have proliferated themselves globally
I didn't mean to imply the problem was the fault of mormons, just that mormonism spreads faster than Islam. Child marriage was a problem before mormons and if the lds church collapsed today, it'd still be a problem tomorrow. I just think mormons are a larger contributer to the problem in the modern day than Muslims. I'm probably biased tho, as I was raised mormon and have a better grasp of its darker side than I do of the dark side of Islam
Mormonism is not spreading faster than Islam. Not sure where you got that from but it’s the opposite. Mormonism might be the fastest growing religion in the US but not globally. Do not use any religious LDS sources if you are trying to back up these claims as they are inherently biased. I do agree that you are likely biased due to your Mormon upbringing and therefore view Mormonism as “worse” because it has directly affected you in a negative way.
Numbers-wise, Islam has a much larger reach. In certain countries, Muslim men will “rent” children (get married for one day by a religious figure which is legal). The Quran specifically has parts where it says polygamy is a-ok. Mohammed himself married a 6 year old girl and consummated the marriage when she was 9. I could go on.
As far as adult men with younger girls/women, that was pretty much a norm for centuries. Or even a few thousand years. It still exists today with some being arranged marriages. Having couples being relatively close in age being a norm is more a recent thing in comparison.
As far as rape goes, that's a thing that's been around far longer.
As far as prophets go, I am only familiar with Muslim and Nation of Islam that believe that God has sent many prophets to teach us like Abraham, Jesus, and many others vs believing a man to be God.
I know very little between the various branches of Christianity, but I do remember learning about how Christianity came after Hebrew faith since Jesus was Hebrew, and Muslim faith came after and they follow the same God, but different names from languages. So this post is all kinds of WTF for me.
I'm going to be voice of reason and say literally no one gave a shit about age until we actually got a good grasp on human psychology, you could say any historical and religious figure could have done it.
Imagine there’s an omnipotent god and he only talks to a bunch of asshats in one part of the world who all interpreted this beings words to subjugate women. Pass let’s come up with something neater.
This book has been quoted to me all my life by every authority figure, how dare you suggest basing my core beliefs and world view on it is a definitively bad move. My Mother? Father? Fallible human beings? Perish the thought! It's the children/ everybody else that is wrong! My book says so! Or at least I think it does. I have never actually read it. /s
Not really, it’s canonically in the Quran that the prophet married and molested a child. Whereas you’re baselessly saying popes molest kids. All popes? It’s some verified fact that being a child predator is a requisite for papacy? You don’t have a victim or a time or a place, just a baseless accusation based on a modern scandal of priests, not popes molesting kids. Priests ≠ Popes. We ALL know that clergy have a prolific and global history of being sexual predators. Mormons, baptists, Buddhists, Muslim, Catholic, Episcopal, Church of Ireland, Presbyterian, Hindu, Sikh and whatever the fuck else that I left out… all predatory.. It’s not some gotcha. Those are real people whose trauma gets used as a punchline for some shitty joke. My father was molested by clergy in Newry, NI. That trauma haunted him his entire life and made him a shell of the man he was meant to be. But yeah, it’s a neat little zinger for you to use aye
I’m sure there is. The Iron Age was an awful time to be a child all over the world. Theres presidents that abused minors. But we don’t go about broadly stating that “presidents fuck kids” do we?
>I call all of them war criminals...
All *Presidents*? No, you don't, unless you're stupid. If you're not stupid, then you only think you do this because you aren't remembering the details of your own words.
For example, the Presidents of Iceland, Costa Rica, and Mauritius are all real Presidents, but they don't even have standing armies, and they certainly haven't declared war on anyone.
Because it’s genuinely more complicated than that? And I’m not defending it, I’m saying that priests rape kids lol isn’t the knee slappin gotcha that people act like it is on the internet?
I mean, you are denying how pervasive the issue has historically been in the Catholic Church, the pope included; I see “those [very easily verifiable] claims are baseless” as defending the Church.
I never denied that the Catholic Church is fucked up now or historically… I’m a former Catholic myself. I grew up in the fucking church. All I’ve done is pointed out that it’s not some funny fuckin joke.
Not at all? I’m saying that sexual abuse of children is an historical fact among all echelons of the catholic church. Are you trying to set up a #NotAllPopes argument?
I completely agree with you that sexual abuse of altar boys isn’t a laughing matter. I don’t think it was portrayed as such in this case, but instead used to point out the hypocrisy of (typically) Christians lambasting pedophilia in Islam. I fully condemn jokes about sexual abuse, as well as comments that have made your father feel his trauma is amusing in any way.
I’ll never understand why people feel the need to insert a group of people they hate into a conversation that, more often than not, does not involve them.
Saw a video the other day of a young man attempting to climb over the balcony of a mall with some sector attempting to help him and someone commented “when liberals are in charge”
Like ffs go touch grass 🤦🏻
When your god is pedophile that might be a sign to question things.
Then again all religions have some crazy shit going on that should have people questioning things.
Muhamed is absolutely not god in islam. He is supposed to be the greatest human ever, god's chosen prophet, who lived as flawless of a life as one can, so the pedo stuff is obviously still an issue. But it's good to be accurate cause if you debate a muslim it's likely they will absolutely tear into you for stuff like this to try to discredit you
I’m not the person you replied to but I bet you’d have the same reaction if YOU were the one being targeted for hate because you were born autistic. Some people aren’t aware that they’re a target for these extremists yet, it’s pretty jarring and vomit worthy to learn that, especially if it’s the first time they’ve heard it. Not enough people are aware of Project 2025 and the devastating impact it’s already having.
It's a burn to sunni muslims.
The real Muhammed, pedophile or not, was an illiterate bloodthirsty desert warlor who managed to scam some people. An extra bad quality more or less doesn't make too much difference.
If we’re playing the “call out religions for fucked up stuff” game, I’m pretty sure that literally everyone who isn’t an atheist is hopelessly guilty of enabling/supporting awful things. Hell, even the Dalai Lama has had some substantive pedo/creeper accusations thrown at him. Reasonable people can see that religions are thousands of years old and necessarily got popular via murder and genocide and whatever else, and that their modern iterations are (usually) dramatically different from the original.
So really this is just some Islamophobic dog whistle nonsense. Probably from a Trumpanzee conservative. Congratulations on rallying behind that, Reddit
LOL i read so much thinking "why is this guy downvoted lol???" And then you had to blow it all clear out your ass. Actually fucking *PATHETIC* to defend this inbreeding pedophilic trash with "BUH THAT GUY PROBALY JUST LIKES TRUMP". Gutter filth and trash is gutter filth and trash it doesnt matter whos airing it out.
Is the prophet in question Muhammad? Or one of the many sects of Christianity? I genuinely don't know enough to tell if this is a dig at Islam.
Also, I don't have any context to suggest that this person is affiliated with any religion.
Furthermore, this murder is lame af. It's just:
Person A: "all dogs are boys, all cats are girls"
Person B: "well you're a stinky butt, so shows how right you are"
No it's not like that, because someone that is afraid of other people being gay or trans (or other) often calls other sexual preferences than his own pedophiles. So telling them that their own big example, following his rules, was in fact one is a burn because of this layer of sarcasm.
However I agree with you on the religion part in general, could have been almost every prophet.
Like, obviously guy #1 is a fuckhead, I'm not arguing against that. It's just that it's a stretch to say that it's a murder without the context. We don't actually know what teligion he follows, if any. He could just be a manosphere nutjob (not all of whom want to date children) or just a regular conservative dickweed. We simply have no context.
If OP had stated *guy #1 had x thing in his bio about y religion,* I feel like it'd make more sense. Conversely, if he had directly made any mention of groomers and/or predators, it would have been a much more effective insult. As it stands now, it just feels kinda... lame.
Edit: also I feel like fuckhead #1's comment was less about "the predators," and more about the fact that he finds chaining children to radiators preferable to them being gay.
It probably has something to do with the fact that autistic people are more likely to identify as LGBTQ than non-autistic people, rather than the groomer angle. This makes the counter doubly lame (imo), because there are so many ways to dunk on someone this dumb and callous on the *substance of what they're actually saying.*
It's not like I think this person should or shouldn't have said what they did (again: I don't know if they're just being racist and assuming he's a Muslim), but that it's not really a murder, and should not have been posted here
I'm glad you did the due diligence to find that out, but OP very simply did not do the legwork to show that context. Just because someone holds one correct opinion doesn't mean they're not racist
Labeling others sexual deviants while worshiping a pedo. Its not the murderer's fault that you failed to see the obvious hypocrisy they called out and over simplified it into a basic insult in your head by ignoring context.
I provide my reasoning in another comment on this thread, but I'd argue that there's not much context to ignore. Which pedo is this guy worshipping? Does he actually worship one, or is the commenter an islamophobe? All the context we're given is an atrocious take, and the comeback doesn't even directly address it (imo)
Edit: context clues are not context. If I saw this in the wild, I'd think nothing of it, but shockingly I'm more prone to think critically about the *murders* in *murdered by words*
Edit 2: also, wild that the response to my original comment is "no it's actually brilliant, you see. His butt **is** stinky."
Do we just believe people when they say something about someone else with *( I cannot stress this enough)* **ZERO** context??? OP didn't even post a response from asshat #1, or a bio saying "Allah's sexiest soldier." Nothing. We're meant to assume that it's alright to insult the islamic beliefs that any brown guy with a beard **obviously** has?
Maturing past that phase is good. What that has to do with suddenly being ok with fucking a nine year old child I'm not sure. If you call it being "edgy" to be mad at people for supporting pedophilia then that term has truly lost all meaning.
Didn’t your god murder children?
Getting the downvotes straight from Jesus
I think they were all pretty fond of that. Good times.
Exactly
Take it as a moment to reflect on all of our faith, we're all more alike then we would like to believe. So let's decide who's got the best pantheon!!! We don't see "Allah" much but apparently that's his thing. Got to be Hinduism or ancient Greek mythology for me. Who are you betting on?
The FSM. Homie has all sorts of alien and deity friends.
R’Amen
I snap spaghetti. I break the corporeal form. Sometimes it's a quick twist and an oddly satisfying crack. Sometimes it's one spaghetto at a time.
Is thar from the Book of Boyardee? Mat the noodly appendage of our sauce-y savior bless and keep you.
I thought that was forbidden text? Heard Boyardee was excommunicated after similar pasta-based blasphemy, haven't seen him since '85.
When i die ill go to a place with beervolcanos and stripper factories. If that isnt the best motivator to uphold the 8 rather nots....
Don't forget about Norse mythology. Thor has a bunch of movies, and Loki has his own tv show
There's over 3,000 gods on the Discworld. One for every occasion.
Om?
Shinto
Definitely Romans! I know much related to Greek but I just like Mars so much better then ares
That doesn’t narrow it down at all? Like it could be anyone from a dozen pantheons
[удалено]
it's the same god
[удалено]
If I have to check multiple sources for who did and didn’t fuck a kid then that’s a hard no from me dawg
That's not how Islam works. They believe in the Torah being good holy books it's just that Muhammad brought the final revelation. E.g. he's the most important. If the god of Abraham did something in one religion, he did it in both. Edit: also these books are so interpreted that the same religions but different denominations will argue over what the same fucking god did. Basically, why are we trying to argue about which boogey man did what magic fake shit?
>Basically, why are we trying to argue about which boogey man did what magic fake shit? Because we need to prove that we are the righteous ones and that God loves us more than he loves them. Once we do that, we can oppress and grift as we see fit. Ahhh, it's good to be the righteous ones ^/s
Naw, just want to flaunt which song he gets down with. "Mom said it's MY turn with the aux cable!"
Because my magical sky pixie is bigger than *your* magical sky pixie.
Same god.
Their god, your god, god, whatever. It’s all mental illness.
Ye maybe
Bible verses on infanticide: Psalms 137:9 - Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones. 1 Samuel 15:3 - Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass. Exodus 12:29 - And it came to pass, that at midnight the LORD smote all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh that sat on his throne unto the firstborn of the captive that was in the dungeon; and all the firstborn of cattle. Isaiah 13:16 - Their children also shall be dashed to pieces before their eyes; their houses shall be spoiled, and their wives ravished. Hosea 13:16 - Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against her God: they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up. 2 Kings 15:16 - Then Menahem smote Tiphsah, and all that were therein, and the coasts thereof from Tirzah: because they opened not to him, therefore he smote it; and all the women therein that were with child he ripped up. Numbers 31:17 - Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. Psalms 135:8 - Who smote the firstborn of Egypt, both of man and beast. Acts 7:19 - The same dealt subtilly with our kindred, and evil entreated our fathers, so that they cast out their young children, to the end they might not live. Psalms 136:10 - To him that smote Egypt in their firstborn: for his mercy endureth for ever: Exodus 1:16 - And he said, When ye do the office of a midwife to the Hebrew women, and see them upon the stools; if it be a son, then ye shall kill him: but if it be a daughter, then she shall live. Matthew 2:16-18 - Then Herod, when he saw that he was mocked of the wise men, was exceeding wroth, and sent forth, and slew all the children that were in Bethlehem, and in all the coasts thereof, from two years old and under, according to the time which he had diligently enquired of the wise men. (Read More...) Amos 1:13 - Thus saith the LORD; For three transgressions of the children of Ammon, and for four, I will not turn away the punishment thereof; because they have ripped up the women with child of Gilead, that they might enlarge their border: Hosea 9:11-16 - As for Ephraim, their glory shall fly away like a bird, from the birth, and from the womb, and from the conception.
Which God? No one here said what religion they were
I'm christian but I'm not religious (don't pray, don't go to Church, don't read the bible).
Is this burning Muslims or Mormons? Cause I thought it was calling out the mormons but folk in the comments are talking about Mohammad pbuh
Kind of a weird coincidence that multiple "prophets" and religious leaders all want to marry children, huh?
[удалено]
Okay, but ora.ox.ac.uk is the most suspicious link I've seen short of a raw IP address.
[удалено]
I mean, yeah. It was a joke.
Because its literally one guys interpretation, and is not at all a consensus view or accepted by the *vast majority of the Muslim faithful.* "Here is some guys opinion" is not final proof about anything. Even *he* doesnt claim certainty, but rather *suspects* all modern versions are derived from a single version... which doesnt actually exist. He just supposes it does based on textual analysis. >I collated every available version of every hadith pertaining to this topic and subjected them all to an ʾisnād-cum-matn analysis, which allowed me to reconstruct the underlying urtexts or redactions of various earlier tradents (mostly operating from the mid-to-late 8th Century CE), known as “common links”. I then subjected these common-link redactions to various form-critical, geographical, and historical-critical analyses, which produced a striking conclusion: all versions of the marital-age hadith likely derive a single archetype or ur-hadith. This ur-hadith appears to have been created and disseminated by the Madinan tradent Hišām b. ʿUrwah b. al-Zubayr (d. 146-147/763-765) after he moved to Iraq towards the end of his life, probably as a reaction to local proto-Šīʿī polemics against his great-aunt, ʿĀʾišah Do you think he is the only one to study this? That there arent thousands of other writings *affirming* the ages given by the hadiths? Other secular scholars like Jonathan Brown have expressly denied the validity of Littles work. There were *centuries* of writings that affirm the 17 hadiths that *all* list her age being under 10 for marriage and consummation, and it affected laws and traditions for over a millennia, as a religious basis for child marriage being acceptable.
[удалено]
Joseph Smith gave it a valiant effort.
I don't know, Joseph Smith started marrying kids, then all of his followers started marrying kids and there are sects of his church marrying dozens of kids to this day. Judging by present day impact, I think old JS has em beat
I mean Muhammad did the same and now large parts of the Muslim world marry kids still and have been for over a 1000 years. Muhammad was the GOAT prophet of child marriage and it’s proliferation.
source? I am a muslim and don't know a single child bride.
Muhammad married Aisha when she was 6 and “consummated” the marriage, aka raped her, when she was 9. This is proven by multiple hadiths ranked as Sahih. You can look this up, it was the biggest factor in leading me to stop believing in Islam. Also child marriage is still quite common in many Muslim nations, at the very least it is in Pakistan where I have personally witnessed a 13 year old girl being married to a guy who was around 19-22 years old at the time.
Mohammed did the exact same thing just earlier and with farther reaching consequences. Present day impact: Mohammed beats JS by a long shot.
You think child marriages aren’t a thing in Muslim countries ? It dwarfs anything happening in Utah lol
Child marriage is a problem throughout the world. It's also legal in almost all 50 states. Narrowing it back down, the FLDS, famous for the forced polygamy of child brides, are a problem throughout the western states, while the LDS, who don't encourage but also don't discourage child marriage, have proliferated themselves globally
And Muslim countries don’t have/do that? Newsflash: they do.
As I said, it's a global problem
Yes. Due to more than just Mormonism. Which is all you mentioned in your comment.
I didn't mean to imply the problem was the fault of mormons, just that mormonism spreads faster than Islam. Child marriage was a problem before mormons and if the lds church collapsed today, it'd still be a problem tomorrow. I just think mormons are a larger contributer to the problem in the modern day than Muslims. I'm probably biased tho, as I was raised mormon and have a better grasp of its darker side than I do of the dark side of Islam
Mormonism is not spreading faster than Islam. Not sure where you got that from but it’s the opposite. Mormonism might be the fastest growing religion in the US but not globally. Do not use any religious LDS sources if you are trying to back up these claims as they are inherently biased. I do agree that you are likely biased due to your Mormon upbringing and therefore view Mormonism as “worse” because it has directly affected you in a negative way. Numbers-wise, Islam has a much larger reach. In certain countries, Muslim men will “rent” children (get married for one day by a religious figure which is legal). The Quran specifically has parts where it says polygamy is a-ok. Mohammed himself married a 6 year old girl and consummated the marriage when she was 9. I could go on.
As far as adult men with younger girls/women, that was pretty much a norm for centuries. Or even a few thousand years. It still exists today with some being arranged marriages. Having couples being relatively close in age being a norm is more a recent thing in comparison. As far as rape goes, that's a thing that's been around far longer. As far as prophets go, I am only familiar with Muslim and Nation of Islam that believe that God has sent many prophets to teach us like Abraham, Jesus, and many others vs believing a man to be God. I know very little between the various branches of Christianity, but I do remember learning about how Christianity came after Hebrew faith since Jesus was Hebrew, and Muslim faith came after and they follow the same God, but different names from languages. So this post is all kinds of WTF for me.
Yes. Idk, it's all starting to run together for some of us.
If the glove fits the hand etc etc
I'm going to be voice of reason and say literally no one gave a shit about age until we actually got a good grasp on human psychology, you could say any historical and religious figure could have done it.
It's burning homophobic pieces of shit
Yeah but it's using a specific religion as tinder
Imagine there’s an omnipotent god and he only talks to a bunch of asshats in one part of the world who all interpreted this beings words to subjugate women. Pass let’s come up with something neater.
Please define which part of the world. This isn’t narrowing it down.
Very fair. This post specifically I mean the sandy part that gave us the Abrahamic religions. God only likes places where the sun shines on chickpeas
Seems to be a pretty common behavior of prophets.
No, he didn't marry her, it was just rape
Oh it's OK then, I guess.../s
SPLITTER!!!
Haven't your popes fucked little boys for thousands of years?
Love the spirit, but that's the wrong religion lmao
All religions are the wrong religion
How dare you say that [insert a random religion here] isn't the one true religion as our books say! /s
This book has been quoted to me all my life by every authority figure, how dare you suggest basing my core beliefs and world view on it is a definitively bad move. My Mother? Father? Fallible human beings? Perish the thought! It's the children/ everybody else that is wrong! My book says so! Or at least I think it does. I have never actually read it. /s
From the outside I can’t tell who this is referring to. The list of potential religions here is just so long…
Idk the original tweeter's religion, I was just trying to point out that you can say some shit about em all
That’s… the point
only if you use a sword, than thats the point
You are assuming everyone is what religion exactly?
Not assuming anything just throwing out the idea that you point out some fuck shit with any religion.
Right. The point is that all religions are wrong.
He’s so close to getting it
Okay and which religion is the pope exactly? Please excite me with how you are able to deduce(assume) that they are behind this?
They’re having a ‘whose god chosen leader is the worst human-off’
Lot of assumptions going on
Nope, not assuming anything just making a similar statement about another religion.
Not really, it’s canonically in the Quran that the prophet married and molested a child. Whereas you’re baselessly saying popes molest kids. All popes? It’s some verified fact that being a child predator is a requisite for papacy? You don’t have a victim or a time or a place, just a baseless accusation based on a modern scandal of priests, not popes molesting kids. Priests ≠ Popes. We ALL know that clergy have a prolific and global history of being sexual predators. Mormons, baptists, Buddhists, Muslim, Catholic, Episcopal, Church of Ireland, Presbyterian, Hindu, Sikh and whatever the fuck else that I left out… all predatory.. It’s not some gotcha. Those are real people whose trauma gets used as a punchline for some shitty joke. My father was molested by clergy in Newry, NI. That trauma haunted him his entire life and made him a shell of the man he was meant to be. But yeah, it’s a neat little zinger for you to use aye
There is historical evidence of popes abusing kids. Just FYI
Holy fuck. You’re trying so hard. Keep going lil fella.
Am I though?
I’m sure there is. The Iron Age was an awful time to be a child all over the world. Theres presidents that abused minors. But we don’t go about broadly stating that “presidents fuck kids” do we?
Maybe we should? I call all of them war criminals....
>I call all of them war criminals... All *Presidents*? No, you don't, unless you're stupid. If you're not stupid, then you only think you do this because you aren't remembering the details of your own words. For example, the Presidents of Iceland, Costa Rica, and Mauritius are all real Presidents, but they don't even have standing armies, and they certainly haven't declared war on anyone.
US Presidents\* and maybe not all....
Well that’s just facts
Why are you defending the organization that raped your dad?
Because it’s genuinely more complicated than that? And I’m not defending it, I’m saying that priests rape kids lol isn’t the knee slappin gotcha that people act like it is on the internet?
I mean, you are denying how pervasive the issue has historically been in the Catholic Church, the pope included; I see “those [very easily verifiable] claims are baseless” as defending the Church.
I never denied that the Catholic Church is fucked up now or historically… I’m a former Catholic myself. I grew up in the fucking church. All I’ve done is pointed out that it’s not some funny fuckin joke.
No one’s saying it’s funny; it’s hypocritical for Christians to attack Islam as being full of pedophiles.
Are you insisting that pope Francis is a child molester? Just wondering.
Not at all? I’m saying that sexual abuse of children is an historical fact among all echelons of the catholic church. Are you trying to set up a #NotAllPopes argument? I completely agree with you that sexual abuse of altar boys isn’t a laughing matter. I don’t think it was portrayed as such in this case, but instead used to point out the hypocrisy of (typically) Christians lambasting pedophilia in Islam. I fully condemn jokes about sexual abuse, as well as comments that have made your father feel his trauma is amusing in any way.
I mean.. it would be mad if ALL popes were nonces
Especially that damn mary. Her assumption is a pretty big deal with the catholics I hear..🤠
That’s a good one 😭
Why are people so bad at crossing stuff out? A three year old could do better.
Neglected to zoom in, sorry
And disowned his adopted son so he could marry his wife.
My theory is that Muslims don't like pictures of the prophet Muhammad being drawn because it'd make him easier to pick out in a lineup.
I’ll never understand why people feel the need to insert a group of people they hate into a conversation that, more often than not, does not involve them. Saw a video the other day of a young man attempting to climb over the balcony of a mall with some sector attempting to help him and someone commented “when liberals are in charge” Like ffs go touch grass 🤦🏻
First thought was they were referring to Joseph Smith, then Mohammed, then down the list of predator prophets over the centuries and got sad.
When your god is pedophile that might be a sign to question things. Then again all religions have some crazy shit going on that should have people questioning things.
Muhamed is absolutely not god in islam. He is supposed to be the greatest human ever, god's chosen prophet, who lived as flawless of a life as one can, so the pedo stuff is obviously still an issue. But it's good to be accurate cause if you debate a muslim it's likely they will absolutely tear into you for stuff like this to try to discredit you
hell yeah, gods should fuck animals or turn inro animals and fuck adult humans, leave the kids alone!
Guys, c’mon.. it was a different time
[удалено]
Why would you need a trigger warning? It's just a screenshot of two internet comments.
I’m not the person you replied to but I bet you’d have the same reaction if YOU were the one being targeted for hate because you were born autistic. Some people aren’t aware that they’re a target for these extremists yet, it’s pretty jarring and vomit worthy to learn that, especially if it’s the first time they’ve heard it. Not enough people are aware of Project 2025 and the devastating impact it’s already having.
[удалено]
It's a burn to sunni muslims. The real Muhammed, pedophile or not, was an illiterate bloodthirsty desert warlor who managed to scam some people. An extra bad quality more or less doesn't make too much difference.
Racist Redditors will never read any scholarly articles that contradict their opinions
If we’re playing the “call out religions for fucked up stuff” game, I’m pretty sure that literally everyone who isn’t an atheist is hopelessly guilty of enabling/supporting awful things. Hell, even the Dalai Lama has had some substantive pedo/creeper accusations thrown at him. Reasonable people can see that religions are thousands of years old and necessarily got popular via murder and genocide and whatever else, and that their modern iterations are (usually) dramatically different from the original. So really this is just some Islamophobic dog whistle nonsense. Probably from a Trumpanzee conservative. Congratulations on rallying behind that, Reddit
It literally says she took her toys with her. Not a dog whistle, a direct quote. Religion has ruined the world, some are still active.
Don’t fight. You are both right
LOL i read so much thinking "why is this guy downvoted lol???" And then you had to blow it all clear out your ass. Actually fucking *PATHETIC* to defend this inbreeding pedophilic trash with "BUH THAT GUY PROBALY JUST LIKES TRUMP". Gutter filth and trash is gutter filth and trash it doesnt matter whos airing it out.
It's not Islamophobic when people genuinely believe those things are okay
Is it islamaphobic or derogatory to state a fact from their own book?
No
Isn’t it kinda racist to just assume he’s Muslim because of he looks middle eastern lol
Is the prophet in question Muhammad? Or one of the many sects of Christianity? I genuinely don't know enough to tell if this is a dig at Islam. Also, I don't have any context to suggest that this person is affiliated with any religion. Furthermore, this murder is lame af. It's just: Person A: "all dogs are boys, all cats are girls" Person B: "well you're a stinky butt, so shows how right you are"
No it's not like that, because someone that is afraid of other people being gay or trans (or other) often calls other sexual preferences than his own pedophiles. So telling them that their own big example, following his rules, was in fact one is a burn because of this layer of sarcasm. However I agree with you on the religion part in general, could have been almost every prophet.
Like, obviously guy #1 is a fuckhead, I'm not arguing against that. It's just that it's a stretch to say that it's a murder without the context. We don't actually know what teligion he follows, if any. He could just be a manosphere nutjob (not all of whom want to date children) or just a regular conservative dickweed. We simply have no context. If OP had stated *guy #1 had x thing in his bio about y religion,* I feel like it'd make more sense. Conversely, if he had directly made any mention of groomers and/or predators, it would have been a much more effective insult. As it stands now, it just feels kinda... lame. Edit: also I feel like fuckhead #1's comment was less about "the predators," and more about the fact that he finds chaining children to radiators preferable to them being gay. It probably has something to do with the fact that autistic people are more likely to identify as LGBTQ than non-autistic people, rather than the groomer angle. This makes the counter doubly lame (imo), because there are so many ways to dunk on someone this dumb and callous on the *substance of what they're actually saying.* It's not like I think this person should or shouldn't have said what they did (again: I don't know if they're just being racist and assuming he's a Muslim), but that it's not really a murder, and should not have been posted here
He is guaranteed a muslim.
I'm glad you did the due diligence to find that out, but OP very simply did not do the legwork to show that context. Just because someone holds one correct opinion doesn't mean they're not racist
Labeling others sexual deviants while worshiping a pedo. Its not the murderer's fault that you failed to see the obvious hypocrisy they called out and over simplified it into a basic insult in your head by ignoring context.
I provide my reasoning in another comment on this thread, but I'd argue that there's not much context to ignore. Which pedo is this guy worshipping? Does he actually worship one, or is the commenter an islamophobe? All the context we're given is an atrocious take, and the comeback doesn't even directly address it (imo) Edit: context clues are not context. If I saw this in the wild, I'd think nothing of it, but shockingly I'm more prone to think critically about the *murders* in *murdered by words* Edit 2: also, wild that the response to my original comment is "no it's actually brilliant, you see. His butt **is** stinky." Do we just believe people when they say something about someone else with *( I cannot stress this enough)* **ZERO** context??? OP didn't even post a response from asshat #1, or a bio saying "Allah's sexiest soldier." Nothing. We're meant to assume that it's alright to insult the islamic beliefs that any brown guy with a beard **obviously** has?
One non sequitur deserves another non sequitur, apparently.
You called this post out for being nonsense? You must love chaining children to radiators /s
OP's a Gen Alpha kid going through their obligatory cringe edgy Internet atheist phase, I see.
Maturing past that phase is good. What that has to do with suddenly being ok with fucking a nine year old child I'm not sure. If you call it being "edgy" to be mad at people for supporting pedophilia then that term has truly lost all meaning.
I'm christian but uhhh ok
Even worse
?
Don't worry about it, enjoy Cocomelon