Tate converting to Islam is hypocritical and ridiculous!

Author: RationalMadman
Islam
News
RM
hypocrisy
andrew tate

Posts

Total: 40
Topic's author
#1
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 564
Posts: 19,916
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
Andrew Tate gained his wealth by a model of revenue that onlyfans now runs by and/or enables. He was a webcam 'escort' service pimp. That was literally how he went from kickboxer making something but not too much to playboy (which is another issue) making millions.

He believes in fucking outside of marriage promiscuously, so much so that he would actually see the limit of 4 wives as a downgrade from his number nearer to 10 that he juggle at the moment in polyamory. 

Andrew Tate has been a diehard Christian or so he said and his brother Tristan is still loyal to Christianity to my knowledge so this move is utterly terrible and makes a rift between them. I am also curious what the hell this is really about? Andrew Tate's stated reasons for converting to Islam are that they are scary, violent and intimidating in defense of their religion, he literally refers to them as the only religion to still be warrior like in how they spread, he 'admires' and 'respects' that apparently... Does he actually realise the irony here?

He went from hating the cancel culture of the West to embracing the more brutal and blatant cancel culture of the East that is violent in how it operates not just socially oppressive.
#2
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 11,251
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
"Converting to Islam" is a universally meaningless concept put forward by an attention seeking, sentient, organic blob.

If others just ignored people like Andrew Tate, then?

But others can't help themselves.

Hence you pander to his nonsense.

Tate can convert to a pineapple for all I care.
#3
Public-Choice
Public-Choice's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 1,035
3
4
8
Public-Choice's avatar
Public-Choice
3
4
8
-->
@RationalMadman
Andrew Tate has been a diehard Christian
Well, if he is sleeping around with 10 women in polyamorous marriages then he is certainly not practicing Christian values to begin with.

Andrew Tate's stated reasons for converting to Islam are that they are scary, violent and intimidating in defense of their religion
Has he even read about the crusades? Christians have a long history of taking up arms to defend their religion. The difference is in the attacks. With the exception of the Inquisition, Christians have largely denounced attacking people to convert them. But for self defense it is an entirely different discussion.
Topic's author
#4
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 564
Posts: 19,916
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@Public-Choice
He meant in modern times.

Crusades were a great sin anyway.
#5
Public-Choice
Public-Choice's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 1,035
3
4
8
Public-Choice's avatar
Public-Choice
3
4
8
-->
@RationalMadman
Crusades were a great sin anyway.
I disagree. Muslims were torturing, raping, and pillaging people. The crusades were a defense of human decency.
Topic's author
#6
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 564
Posts: 19,916
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@Public-Choice
So were the Christians, they did not colonise much kinder at all.
#7
Public-Choice
Public-Choice's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 1,035
3
4
8
Public-Choice's avatar
Public-Choice
3
4
8
-->
@RationalMadman
Large difference between Catholic and Christian in the middle ages. Also what is your proof the Catholics were raping and pillaging?
Topic's author
#8
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 564
Posts: 19,916
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@Public-Choice
I mean your own proud nation of US, study what Columbus and his homeboys did.

Take literally any nation that is now Christian and study how they were turned Christian.
#9
Public-Choice
Public-Choice's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 1,035
3
4
8
Public-Choice's avatar
Public-Choice
3
4
8
-->
@RationalMadman
study what Columbus and his homeboys did.
You mean just show up on a continent and accidentally bring diseases that they were immune to? You really want to fault all Christians for the accident of one?

It was not malicious by any means.

Take literally any nation that is now Christian and study how they were turned Christian.
Kenya?
Topic's author
#10
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 564
Posts: 19,916
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@Public-Choice
I mean what are you asking?

Are you trying to find an exception or something?

We don't have the best records what the Brits did to the Kenyans and we can argue it wasn't done in the name of Christianity regardless. However if you mean the colonisation of Africa in general, it wasn't just brutal during the colonisation, it was brutal even after and the so-called Christians laughed as they got some from some tribes trade away natives from other tribes to be slaves.
Topic's author
#11
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 564
Posts: 19,916
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@Public-Choice
Maybe some sources like this will help:


The best of course will be long documentaries or paid books.
#12
Public-Choice
Public-Choice's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 1,035
3
4
8
Public-Choice's avatar
Public-Choice
3
4
8
-->
@RationalMadman
So when I say "Christian" I mean people who ascribe to Christianity and try to live a godly life. I don't mean nations that called themselves "Christian" and then did whatever they wanted.

Kenya, recently, became a Christian nation. There was no violent overthrow of the regime.

A lot of the colonialism of recent history was not really Christian in action.
#13
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,282
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
does anyone remember how the media flipped out when Cassius Clay changed his name to Muhammad Ali after he converted to Islam ?
Topic's author
#14
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 564
Posts: 19,916
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@3RU7AL
It seems to be a religion that attracts violent people, that much is for sure.
Topic's author
#15
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 564
Posts: 19,916
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@Public-Choice
A lot of the colonialism of recent history was not really Christian in action.
Same with the Islam.

It is definitely not Islamic to rape, especially outside of marriage. It also is Christian to pressure people to turn to the 'real' or 'true' God it's just less explicit than Islam on the matter. Otherwise, Christianity would never ever have spread beyond its original group of disciples and their close friends and family.
#16
Public-Choice
Public-Choice's avatar
Debates: 18
Posts: 1,035
3
4
8
Public-Choice's avatar
Public-Choice
3
4
8
-->
@RationalMadman
I have to disagree. Muhammad himself condoned raping married women as spoils of war:

Muhaririz said:  "I entered the mosque and saw Abu Said al-Khudri.  I sat with him and asked about withdrawing the penis (while having intercourse), Abu Said said:  We went out with the Apostle of Allah on the expedition to Banu al-Mustaliq, and took some Arab women captive, and we desired the women, for we were suffering from the absence of our wives, and we wanted ransom; so we intended to withdraw the penis (while having intercourse with the slave-women).  But we asked ourselves:  "Can we draw the penis when the apostle of Allah is among us before asking him about it?"  So we asked him about it.  He said, "It does not matter if you do not do it, for every soul that is to be born up to the Day of Resurrection will be born." (hadith of the Sunan Dawud, Volume 2, #2167)
Muhammad, here, says it is perfectly fine to commit adultery with captured female married slaves. He even said they could cum in them and not worry about if they will get pregnant or not before reselling them as the ransom.

Further from the same hadith, but this time #2150 in volume 2:

Abu Said al-Khudri said:  "The apostle of Allah sent a military expedition to Awtas on the occasion of the battle of Hunain.  They met their enemy and fought with them.  They defeated them and took them captives. Some of the Companions of the apostle of Allah were reluctant to have intercourse with the female captives in the presence of their husbands who were unbelievers. So Allah, the Exalted, sent down the Quranic verse, "And all married women (are forbidden) unto you save those (captives) whom your right hands possess".  That is to say, they are lawful for them when they complete their waiting period."  [The Quran verse is 4:24].
So if a woman is a slave, married or not, you are allowed to fuck them as much as you want. This is even a command from allah.

Moreover, Muhammad himself was allowed to have sex with underage slave girls. This is proven in quran 33:50, 23:5-6, and 70:22-30.

There's also passages about being allowed to tax infidels out of their belongings (Quran 9:29) and other such things. 

So, no. Islam was always pro-rape, pillaging, and taxation. To assert differently is to completely rewrite Islam. Muhammad himself said he received a command from allah that it is perfectly fine to rape people's wives so long as they are taken as slaves first.
Topic's author
#17
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 564
Posts: 19,916
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@Public-Choice
In case you are unaware, Qur'an is considered the absolute script to follow, the Hadith is considered somewhat flawed.

As in, Muslims are allowed to disagree and not follow the way Muhammad did Islam but they are not allowed to deny a teaching in the Qur'an.

that said, I am with you on this, I have very very little nice to say about Islam and am shocked Tate converted, it seems to be a marketing ploy so that he now can appeal to the Muslims viewers more as he's been chased off of Western ones.
#18
K_Michael
K_Michael's avatar
Debates: 38
Posts: 749
4
5
10
K_Michael's avatar
K_Michael
4
5
10
-->
@Public-Choice
Muslims were torturing, raping, and pillaging people. The crusades were a defense of human decency.
If this was the reason the Crusades happened, the medieval Christians would have fought the Muslims where they were doing this, on the frontier of their empire in Africa or Spain. No, the Crusades' primary goal was the "liberate" the Holy Land.
#19
Yassine
Yassine's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 1,085
3
2
6
Yassine's avatar
Yassine
3
2
6
Andrew Tate gained his wealth by a model of revenue that onlyfans now runs by and/or enables. He was a webcam 'escort' service pimp. That was literally how he went from kickboxer making something but not too much to playboy (which is another issue) making millions.
- Why are you complaining. All this is good in your culture, & evidently not allowed in Islam.


He believes in fucking outside of marriage promiscuously, so much so that he would actually see the limit of 4 wives as a downgrade from his number nearer to 10 that he juggle at the moment in polyamory. 
- I love how deep down you know that having no-upper limit in permissible relationship (like is the case in Sharia) is not a good thing. The guy is willing to sacrifice Western promiscuous values for more traditional ones. Maybe you should covert too.


Andrew Tate has been a diehard Christian or so he said and his brother Tristan is still loyal to Christianity to my knowledge so this move is utterly terrible and makes a rift between them.
- I thought you believe in "freedom of choice" & all that jazz! I am sure you wouldn't have given it a second thought if he converted to say Atheism or Buddhism. 


I am also curious what the hell this is really about? Andrew Tate's stated reasons for converting to Islam are that they are scary, violent and intimidating in defense of their religion,
- So, to you anyone who isn't a complete slave to your destructive & oppressive West is violent & intimidating. I am not surprised, apparently misgendering someone nowadays in your countries is also an act of violence...


he literally refers to them as the only religion to still be warrior like in how they spread, he 'admires' and 'respects' that apparently...
- Stop lying. It is YOUR culture that has spread in the world with sheer violence of all forms & overbearing intimidation at global scale. 


Does he actually realise the irony here?
- I think it is you who hasn't got a clue.


He went from hating the cancel culture of the West to embracing the more brutal and blatant cancel culture of the East that is violent in how it operates not just socially oppressive.
- You are projecting. I am guessing to feel less miserable about your disgusting tyrannical culture.


So were the Christians, they did not colonise much kinder at all.
- You are right in that Muslims colonized others with kindness, I wouldn't say the same about Christians.


It is definitely not Islamic to rape, especially outside of marriage.
- This is true.


It also is Christian to pressure people to turn to the 'real' or 'true' God it's just less explicit than Islam on the matter.
- It's actually just as explicit. The Christian "Compel them to come in" vs the Islamic "There is no compulsion in religion". 


Otherwise, Christianity would never ever have spread beyond its original group of disciples and their close friends and family.
- As much as I recognize Christianity's spread by the sword, it is not fair to generalize. Christianity has indeed spread in many parts of the Middle East in the earlier centuries without much violence. 


In case you are unaware, Qur'an is considered the absolute script to follow, the Hadith is considered somewhat flawed.
- This isn't true. Some Hadiths are authentic, some aren't. Authentic Hadith have the same authority according to most legal schools (except Hanafis) as the Quran).


As in, Muslims are allowed to disagree and not follow the way Muhammad did Islam but they are not allowed to deny a teaching in the Qur'an.
- This is absolutely not true. Literally, the criterion of entering Islam or leaving it is the belief in the truth of the beloved Prophet (pbuh), not the Quran. If a person believes in teh Quran but does not believe what the Prophet (pbuh) said is true, they are not considered Muslim. & if hypothetically, a person believes sincerely that the Quran is not relayed by the beloved Prophet (pbuh) yet believes in the truth of what the Prophet (pbuh) said, they are deemed Muslim.


that said, I am with you on this, I have very very little nice to say about Islam
- I expected nothing less. The beautiful Islam is a poison to your ugly culture. 


and am shocked Tate converted, it seems to be a marketing ploy so that he now can appeal to the Muslims viewers more as he's been chased off of Western ones.
- This is beautiful. 


I mean your own proud nation of US, study what Columbus and his homeboys did.
- Your secular liberal nations did worse, & still doing.


Take literally any nation that is now Christian and study how they were turned Christian.
- Why don't you do the same for Muslim nations & study how they became Muslim. You will realize than that not everyone else does it like you do, by forcing others to submit to your values & beliefs. Muslims ruled much of Black Africa for 5 to 8 centuries & were still the minority. Once Christians invaded, the entire continent Christianized in one generation.  

Topic's author
#20
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 564
Posts: 19,916
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@Yassine
I am also curious what the hell this is really about? Andrew Tate's stated reasons for converting to Islam are that they are scary, violent and intimidating in defense of their religion,
- So, to you anyone who isn't a complete slave to your destructive & oppressive West is violent & intimidating. I am not surprised, apparently misgendering someone nowadays in your countries is also an act of violence...


he literally refers to them as the only religion to still be warrior like in how they spread, he 'admires' and 'respects' that apparently...
- Stop lying. It is YOUR culture that has spread in the world with sheer violence of all forms & overbearing intimidation at global scale. 

I would like you to consider who you are replying to, me or Andrew Tate right now.

Please view this:


part of what he likes is the warrior aspect of them, the rigid stubbornness and aggression.
#21
3RU7AL
3RU7AL's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 13,282
3
4
9
3RU7AL's avatar
3RU7AL
3
4
9
-->
@Yassine
and am shocked Tate converted, it seems to be a marketing ploy so that he now can appeal to the Muslims viewers more as he's been chased off of Western ones.
- This is beautiful. 
yep
#22
Intelligence_06
Intelligence_06's avatar
Debates: 167
Posts: 3,837
5
8
11
Intelligence_06's avatar
Intelligence_06
5
8
11
To be fair, the earliest Christians, including such as Jesus and Joseph, would consider Andrew Tate and most conservatives heretic and misinterpreted.

Does "converting to islam" even mean anything today? We know some of the times all they mean is attention-seeking and riding the wave, provided by tools of the politics, such as cancel culture and political correctness
Topic's author
#23
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 564
Posts: 19,916
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@Yassine
how did Iran turn Muslim from Persia
#24
Yassine
Yassine's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 1,085
3
2
6
Yassine's avatar
Yassine
3
2
6
-->
@Public-Choice
Well, if he is sleeping around with 10 women in polyamorous marriages then he is certainly not practicing Christian values to begin with.
- Which Christian values are you talking about? It is fornication? Because that is literally the norm among you Christians today, following the example of the Biblical prophets & characters. Is it inordinate sex? I think you long moved from that. Is it polyamorous relationships? Because these are legal in your countries, & have been legal (or at least nonprosecuted) for men (even married) in the Christian world since ever; even since the times of prophets, most of whom were polygamous. Women in your cultures were seen as property of men until the late 19th century, & Men were free to be adulterers & have multiple mistresses when women were not & could be murdered by their cuckold husband without repercussion until the late 20th century.


Has he even read about the crusades? Christians have a long history of taking up arms to defend their religion.
- & your example of defense of religion is the Crusades? A bunch of hungry savages from France & Britain crossing a continent towards peoples they have virtually no connection to in the Middle East, to supposedly "reclaim" a land which has never belonged to them in the first place, from its natives, by literally massacring 1/4th the population of the region: men, women, children, Muslims, Christians, Jews, without discrimination; through the most cruel & savage methods: torture, impalement & even cannibalism; while massacring fellow Christians on the way who belong to other sects, & even sacking the capital of the allies the Orthodox, raping their women & pillaging their wealth. 


The difference is in the attacks. With the exception of the Inquisition, Christians have largely denounced attacking people to convert them. But for self defense it is an entirely different discussion.
- LMAO! Literally 99% of Christian history is attacking others & converting them. Your ancestors have most likely suffered the same fate for you to be Christian today. The Christian population in the Middle East went from 50% to 20% under 13 centuries of Islamic rule, in the core of the Islamic world. It took Muslims more than 4 centuries to surpass Christian population in places like Syria & Egypt, & 5 centuries in Spain. In Eastern Europe, under 6 centuries of Islamic rule, the population was still largely Christian. In Subsaharan Africa, Muslims were still minorities even after 5 to 8 centuries of Islamic rule. In India, 8 centuries of Islamic rule & the overwhelming majority is still Hindu. – Contrastingly, every nation that has ever been invaded & ruled by Christians is absolutely Christianized within a generation. When Christians took over Spain, not a single Muslim or Jew was left. When they took over Eastern Europe (Bulgaria, Greece, Romania...) every last Muslim was immediately purged. When they invaded the Americas, well you know... The indigenous religions of Africa virtually all disappeared within a single generation of Christian rule. All of this is also true for Europeans before they were Christianized. 
 

I disagree. Muslims were torturing, raping, and pillaging people.
- This never happened. The Arab Conquests lasted over a 100 years, spread from Spain to China. I challenge you to find a single such instance. 


The crusades were a defense of human decency.
- You must mean by human decency: genocide, mass rape, cannibalism, impaling, torture, & pillaging. 


Large difference between Catholic and Christian in the middle ages. Also what is your proof the Catholics were raping and pillaging?
- The proof is your sheer ignorance of History & holding on to dear hope that your fantasies are true. But we are here to enlighten, some snippets:
".... On the morning of December 12, the garrison negotiated with Bohemond, who promised them safe conduct if they surrendered. The Muslims surrendered, but the crusaders immediately began to massacre the population..... I shudder to tell that many of our people, harassed by the madness of excessive hunger, cut pieces from the buttocks of the Saracens already dead there, which they cooked, but when it was not yet roasted enough by the fire, they devoured it with savage mouth.... Albert of Aix remarked that "the Christians did not shrink from eating not only killed Turks or Saracens, but even creeping dogs..."
"[our men] were killing and slaying even to the Temple of Solomon, where the slaughter was so great that our men waded in blood up to their ankles..." " in the Temple and porch of Solomon men rode in blood up to their knees and bridle reins." "In this temple 10,000 were killed. Indeed, if you had been there you would have seen our feet coloured to our ankles with the blood of the slain. But what more shall I relate? None of them were left alive; neither women nor children were spared."
"the Crusaders systematically violated the city's [Constantinople] holy sanctuaries, destroying or stealing all they could lay hands on; nothing was spared, not even the tombs of the emperors inside the St Apostles church. The civilian population of Constantinople were subject to the Crusaders' ruthless lust for spoils and glory; thousands of them were killed in cold blood. Women, including nuns, were raped by the Crusader army, which also sacked churches, monasteries and convents. The very altars of these churches were smashed and torn to pieces for their gold and marble by the warriors."


You mean just show up on a continent and accidentally bring diseases that they were immune to? You really want to fault all Christians for the accident of one? It was not malicious by any means.
- I don't know if this is ignorance or just denial. He actually slaughtered them to the last man, so did his successors. Even in modern America up to couple decades ago, "uncivilized" (aka non-Christian) children were mass abducted from their parents & put in boarding schools to be "civilized" into Christian "values". 


Kenya?
- The Christian World*.


So when I say "Christian" I mean people who ascribe to Christianity and try to live a godly life. I don't mean nations that called themselves "Christian" and then did whatever they wanted.
- It is you who do whatever you wanted. Back then, they didn't pick & chose from the Bible like Christians do today, at least for the most part. Secularism is the moral power in your countries today, you're not living a godly life not by any stretch. Look at your own self now lying through your teeth about Islam & Muslims & everything else with no shame. Lying is a sin, or does that not matter to you?


Kenya, recently, became a Christian nation. There was no violent overthrow of the regime.
A lot of the colonialism of recent history was not really Christian in action.
- The people involved very much believed it was. 'In the glory of Christ' as they used to say...


#25
Yassine
Yassine's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 1,085
3
2
6
Yassine's avatar
Yassine
3
2
6
-->
@Public-Choice

Muhammad, here, says it is perfectly fine to commit adultery with captured female married slaves.
- Liar, no such thing was said. You just defeated yourself. If these men committed adultery, they would've been stoned. I know this one is a favorite of diehard Islamophobes like you, but it's also one of my favorites. Despite your wishful thinking, this story shows the greatness of Islam & the beloved Prophet (pbuh). Indeed, report aimed at legitimizing contraception with no context is the perfect target to fill in the blanks with your lies. There is no mention of "rape" or "adultery" or any of your lies in the report. Where do you get that from? Where is the backstory? 

-  The first giveaway is that intercourse with pagans is categorically prohibited in Sharia "do not perform nikah (marriage/intercourse) with pagan women until they believe." (2:221) & punishable by death (for non-virgins). The female captives or POW were pagan. If these men were actually having intercourse with them they would've been put to death. But this didn't happen. Why? The reason is because those female POW opted to embrace Islam which allowed them to be intimate with the Muslim men they joined, when other female POW instead chose ransom or freedom according to Sharia ["bind captives [of war] firmly, then release them later either by grace or by ransom –until the toils of war have ended." (47:4)"If any of your slaves wish to pay for their freedom, make a contract with them accordingly" (24:33)]. Juwayrya bint Harith "entered into an agreement to purchase her freedom" then sought the beloved Prophet (pbuh) for help. He would then offer to pay her ransom in exchange for marriage, to which she agreed. Thereafter, Muslims "released the captives in their possession and set them free, and said: They are the relatives of the Messenger of Allah by marriage." "One hundred families of Banu al-Mustaliq were set free on account of her.". A hostile tribe that just moments ago was bent on attacking Muslims quickly became their new allies. – What do your Christian nations accord POW?! Absolutely nothing except dungeons, torture & death, all at the mercy of the captors. Just imagine for the sake of argument the US (or any Christian nation) doing what the beloved Prophet (pbuh) did to their own POW like al-Qaeda: Give them the right to ransom & release them if they pledge allegiance to the US – Give them a chance to purchase their own freedom with the financial help of the US president; – & Give them total amnesty in exchange for a marriage alliance with one of their POW with the US president... LMAO! As if this will ever happen... Humble yourselves & realize the moral abyss from where you're talking. 


He even said they could cum in them and not worry about if they will get pregnant or not before reselling them as the ransom.
- More lying, like a good Christian. This is what Christians really care about, SEX. Out of the +50k hadiths out there about every possible other subject, these are the ones your filthy hearts & minds want. – As to your lies, No. They can't ransom them if they are pregnant. That makes them Um-Walad, who are effectively freewoman. 



So if a woman is a slave, married or not, you are allowed to fuck them as much as you want.
- You're missing the part where all of those were pardoned & returned. Regardless, you are just projecting your Bible doctrines into the Hadith from sheer wishful thinking: "And now, slay every male among the infants, indeed, slay every woman knowing a man by the lying of a male, and all the infants among the women who have not known the lying of a male you have kept alive for yourselves." (Numbers 13:17-18). Shameless! –  It is interesting that you're complaining about the beloved Prophet (pbuh) for guaranteeing ransom, integration & emancipation rights to POWs, when your Christian countries grant absolutely no rights to POWs whatsoever. POWs in the present (or past) West have ZERO rights (in all Western countries), except to be at the mercy of their captors. 

- The very Hadith you're quoting negates your lies. If there is a waiting period (between 1 & 10 months), then they can't do what they want now can they?! Evidently, all engagements of POW are void upon capture, including marriage contracts (Though, there are some exceptions in Sharia: the marriage is maintained if husband & wife are captured together, the children & parents must not be separated...etc). No such rights are granted in your Laws. In fact, all the rights granted to POW by the beloved Prophet (pbuh) have never existed in your laws. – He commanded that POWs be (in this order): Accommodated  (lodged, fed, clothed & cared for, without harm), Exchanged (with Muslim POWs held by enemies), Pardoned (for purpose of alliance with former enemies, which happens to be the fate of the overwhelming majority of POWs), Released (under security conditions, such as pledge of non-hostility or in exchange for service to Muslims), Ransomed ( settlement with the family or nation of the prisoner), Integrated (into Muslim society in a guardianship bondage under the care of a Muslim family), & Emancipated (from bondage through various ways: best charity, atonement for sins, 1/8th Islamic Tax goes to freeing slaves, contract to buy back freedom, pregnancy...). In Islam, if POWs are not exchanged or ransomed by their people, they are reintegrated into Muslim society & left astray. – Contrast this to the perpetual internment, enslavement, rape, torture or death for POWs in your Christian West... Show me the rights POW have on your side.


Moreover, Muhammad himself was allowed to have sex with underage slave girls. This is proven in quran 33:50, 23:5-6, and 70:22-30.
- Have some shame. Don't project your disgusting culture & laws into ours. How about we have a formal debate on these topics? You seem to have a lot to say. Maybe you can show everyone how bad Islam is & the true colors of the beloved Prophet (pbuh). 


There's also passages about being allowed to tax infidels out of their belongings (Quran 9:29) and other such things. 
- What's the idea then? 


So, no. Islam was always pro-rape, pillaging, and taxation.
- You're projecting again. This is literally your laws. Non-Christians have no rights in Christian Law, & non-nationals have no rights in any Western Law. These are facts. Whereas, non-Muslims are all inviolable in Islamic Law unless otherwise invalidated (by criminal or hostile activity). 90% of all invasions, pillaging, mass rape, & displacement in the world in the past 1000 years were done by Christians & Westerners.  


To assert differently is to completely rewrite Islam. Muhammad himself said he received a command from allah that it is perfectly fine to rape people's wives so long as they are taken as slaves first.
- You seem pretty confident about your assertions. Let's have a debate about the subject. I'll let you chose.

#26
Yassine
Yassine's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 1,085
3
2
6
Yassine's avatar
Yassine
3
2
6
@RationalMadman

how did Iran turn Muslim from Persia
- Through standing in awe of Islam & its beauty. Contrary to your expectations, conversion of non-Muslims in Persia was actually discouraged in early Islamic History. The Umayyads blocked new converts from migrating to Muslim cities & imposed double taxation on them to discourage conversions. It was not until Umar II, 8 decades after the conquests, that these policies were abolished. Upon conquest, Umar (2nd Caliph) allowed Persians to keep their land under the condition they cultivate it, which boosted harvest. He built cities in Persia & banned Muslims from purchasing any exterior land from Persians. All citizens, including Persians, were entitled to one garment & one pair of shoes a year, mothers to 7 years of child support from pregnancy, the blind & handicapped to helpers, the destitute to support, & the indebted to compensation. Uthman (3rd Caliph) appointed Persians in government, & granted property rights to anyone who cultivates new land for a year. He build canals across Iraq & Persia, established the Persian regiment, & incorporated Persians in education. In fact, in the time of Caliph Umar II all debt of all citizens, including Persians, was paid by the state. Caliph Harun Rashid built the Maristan (the 1st hospital in the world) & Bayt Hikma (the 1st university in the world) initially for Nestorian Persians who translated the works of Greeks, Romans & Persians into Arabic. He had two sons, Al-Amin from an Arab mother supported by the Arab faction, & Al-Mamun from a Persian mother supported by the Persian faction. Al-Mamun won, & so did the Persians. Persians flourished in early Islamic History, & dominated the political & academic life of Muslims. 4 of the authors of the Six Canonical Collections were Persian. The founder of one of the Four Madhab was Persian (Abu Hanifa). The greatest Muslim mathematician & founder of Algebra Khawarizmi is Persian... the list is long. Is this enough?

#27
Yassine
Yassine's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 1,085
3
2
6
Yassine's avatar
Yassine
3
2
6
-->
@3RU7AL
yep
- I really meant it in the sense of "I am enjoying your frustration". 

#28
Yassine
Yassine's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 1,085
3
2
6
Yassine's avatar
Yassine
3
2
6
@RationalMadman,

I would like you to consider who you are replying to, me or Andrew Tate right now.

Please view this:


part of what he likes is the warrior aspect of them, the rigid stubbornness and aggression.
- You are literally lying. He is talking about standing up against the oppressive West & LGBT hegemony & here you are calling this aggression, contrary to Christians who have no red lines & just submit. So I was right, to you anyone who isn't a complete slave to your destructive & oppressive West & LGBT is violent & intimidating. & it is still a *FACT* that It is YOUR culture that has spread in the world with sheer violence of all forms & overbearing intimidation at global scale. 

#29
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 11,251
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Yassine
If people feel intimidated by LGBT, they obviously think about it too much.

Which is usually the way that it works.

The most perverse of thought, are those that continually worry about what other people get up to.

My advice to them is go chat to some imaginary GOD and stop obsessing about other people's penis and vagina activity.

Or pop to some degenerate backwater somewhere and stone a woman to death, perhaps that will relieve their sexual angst.
Topic's author
#30
RationalMadman
RationalMadman's avatar
Debates: 564
Posts: 19,916
10
11
11
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
10
11
11
-->
@Yassine
I have unblocked you.

Please challenge me to a debate on if Iran became Shi'ite Sharia from Persia through primarily brutal compulsion or consensual belief altering.