Do you think it's fun to Debate about this topic? Do you think it's a children's game? Do you think slandering a prophet and His pious wife has no consequences? If you think that way then you are wrong. I have done it properly and in good manner. There is still a lot of information and data to analyze and use in this regard, but i do not feel any need of it right now.
I shall debate on topics which are more pressing, and I have expertise on them as well. Probably Islam vs atheism.
Then why gave tie? You know if I would have gotten justice on that debate I would have accepted mormons debate and this one without hesitation. But I saw biased, that is why I am hesitating.
Even winning this is not big deal.
I have already given names for judges
voting period 6 months.
I will add a bit of my own rules. Some of them you guys are already familiar. But I will it again, why I should be defensive. I have done debate about this topic in great detail. this debate is nothing but to frame me.
even though I am not that easy to be framed. But still with biased votes and arrogant behavior, winner to come looser is not very hard.
david in last debate why not you voted in my favor while you admitted “Though I do appreciate Con and his abilities, but I think he fell short on this one, however Pro's extreme stance and his conduct would make this a tie”
I do not think a conduct should give a tie, because in 1 point system there is no conduct points.
you should have given me argument points.
Con fell short, then why tie?
By saying that, you are trolling me?
By the way, what is the grand plan?
Islam is as simple as Nature. Islam is made up on Nature, we call it fitrah.
Do not try the same approach you do with Christians.
why I am not taking debates any more you wanna know?
Well as I can't wait for your answer so let me tell you any way.
As I said in comment section at the end of my last debate that, I will go on offensive stance, not any more defensive.
I can do this debate easy peasy, and can win even. But why not take a better approach.
The thing is you see anything happens within Islam whether it's in earlier time or even nowadays is with the will of Allah.
If I can prove Islam is true religion and Allah is creator of everything and everything happens with his will and in every process or event there is something good from him. Then it will be easier to convince, that something was destined from Allah to happen in the way it happened. Probably you can call it that grand plan, if you were referring it to be.
In short, if you are a Muslim, it will be easy to make you accept things which seems different for you now.
No matter how much solid argument I present, it won't affect you much, so why not try to convince you in a way I have already mentioned above.
In the last message, I tagged the wrong person.
as rational mad man has blocked me i cant tag him.
By saying that, you are trolling me?
By the way, what is the grand plan?
Islam is as simple as Nature. Islam is made up on Nature, we call it fitrah.
Do not try the same approach you do with Christians.
why I am not taking debates any more you wanna know?
Well as I can't wait for your answer so let me tell you any way.
As I said in comment section at the end of my last debate that, I will go on offensive stance, not any more defensive.
I can do this debate easy peasy, and can win even. But why not take a better approach.
The thing is you see anything happens within Islam whether it's in earlier time or even nowadays is with the will of Allah.
If I can prove Islam is true religion and Allah is creator of everything and everything happens with his will and in every process or event there is something good from him. Then it will be easier to convince, that something was destined from Allah to happen in the way it happened. Probably you can call it that grand plan, if you were referring it to be.
In short, if you are a Muslim, it will be easy to make you accept things which seems different for you now.
No matter how much solid argument I present, it won't affect you much, so why not try to convince you in a way I have already mentioned above.
Word forms: plural ˈchildren
1. an infant; baby
2. an unborn offspring; fetus
3. a boy or girl in the period before puberty
4. a son or daughter; offspring
5.
a. a descendant
b. a member of a tribe, clan, etc.
often used in pl.
children of Israel
6. a person like a child in interests, judgment, etc., or one regarded as immature and childish
7. a person identified with a specified place, time, etc.
a child of the Renaissance
8. a thing that springs from a specified source; product
a child of one's imagination
9. Archaic
childe
10. British, Dialectal
a female infant
i do not know why you want that? i have done whole 5 round debate about it already. and i have made everything clear in it.
its just tard minds who cannot understand.
If I prove it in private messages, would you change your mind? I guess probably not. I did for barney but no benefit. On the other hand your RFD was very long, I am already tired from that debate and wanted to have rest and give time to my family, that is why I did not want to go in deep with it.
I have found a way to have judges for my debates, problem solved. And slainte, if I lose that means I have weakness in my knowledge, while Islam is perfect. So loosing is what from which you should learn.
But, the votes I call vote bomb, I can prove them here by discussing them in full detail. But I do not want to waste my time on that. Probably I will do debate on this topic again in near future.
Right now I wanted to spend this weekend with my family, let's see when I will do it again, though before that I need to familiarize with some people, I think are honest. And I can make them judges on my debates.
No matter how many times you come, I can defeat you. I can already see how hard you tried to make it tie, and for defeating you will embarrass yourself more.
But I never run from this, I can start another debate when I want and when it will be necessary with whomever I want and whenever I want. Though I have learned one thing, I should choose judges and only choose who are unbiased, and there will be not even single Muslims in it.
Now get rest and I know how much upset you guys are being helpless.
bye and plz do not disturb.
i considered the RFD of best.korea the best one, if you consider his vote to be vote bomb, and barney's good one and bellas' as well, then i am out of here, any ways. though i would say honesty is best policy.
i got what is this place like.
i am done with it.
I think there is option to delete account.
all efforts in vain,
other debate you instigated, i will drop that as well.
One more thing though, as Sir.lancelot himself considered the last two votes to be vote bomb, that is enough for me to confirm that they are. If you realize that is a big thing, and why he said that? It is because he wanted to win fair and square.
Any ways, his acknowledgment is a big deal for me.
Thanks, everyone.
On the other hand I am a bit rusty, otherwise on DDO every opponent was forfeiting maximum 3rd round, I should have not left any roam to let people even vote bomb.
hahaha, that is what i was going to say but i left it, if RFD would have been good i would say, great job. But in the end it was garbage as well.
well i was reading RFD of bella, man i could not do anything but laugh, hahahahhahaha
so funny.
have fun kids
I am blocking you now as you are annoying me. Lancelot is a snake, bad as a Munafiq. Be careful to trust anything he tells you. There is no rule against helping someone write their RFD, I just happened to not do it.
hi,
I want to ask, if you can testify that you have written RFD for barney and also for bellaasp?
Sir.lancelot can also affirm if he agrees or know about it.
Any ways, being toxic is not fun, if the environment become like it was on DDO. i had good friends, and here i go i have become bad and only 1 friend request i got so far, that time within little time I got 100s of friends.
let's switch back the saith Tigerlord AKA makhdoom5
sorry to anyone who got toxicity from me, as i am kinda good with Lancelot, which I feel very good about. I hope I can achieve with others too.
Sorry lancy for being rude in debate.
and publish the debate you instigated with me, i want voter to accept the invite as well.
lets have a good debate.
Sorry to all again.
:)
Barney plz provide better RFD.
haven't checked for bella, but i can have discussion with her, do you want it bella? i mean about vote, but let me read first.
Do you see Muslims voting here? if they cannot vote here, then i have done my task, Allah knows best, and he know i have done my part, its their own responsibility at least use brains that much to vote. if they cannot do that then what can i do?
it totally can be seen that, there are biased votes, or vote bombs. i got votes from non Muslim and un biased people. which should be enough to prove that i have done my job.
its their intellectual dishonesty they vote bomb.
if i have to work that much to debate then do another debate with voter, then its better i should go off from this website.
Voter
Saw was sexy:
Pro argues it's not pedophilia if the aggressor is is hot... WTF did I just read?
Rebuttal
you are fcking tard, what I mean there was, if someone say a woman prefer young over old maybe because old is old, then I want to put light upon this issue that prophet did not get old at all, only age was 53 but he remain young till he died. It is miracle.
Voter
But when a brain has filthy poop in it, it only splash poop out from every hole.
Voter
Various off topic rants:
Please stick to the damned topic. There's a comment section for side rants.
Conduct (con):
The comment section is usually off limits but pro truly stepped over the line just before his final argument in what feels like an attempt to poison the well for early voters.
https://www.debateart.com/debates/4533/comments/54727
https://info.debateart.com/terms-of-service/voting-policy#cheating
Conversely, con was impatient at the very start of the debate, and otherwise mostly stayed out of the comment section.
Additionally, pro committed no less than 11 ad hominem attacks in the final round... And damning his own arguments while he's at it, he implies that Islam is good with marrying "adult" girls at the tender age of 8 months...
"Lina Medina started having mensuration at the age of 8 months the extremest case of precocious puberty. But my opponent is dumbest of all, can not see it at all what I have wrote just wasting time with his nonsense."
Rebuttal
one of the debater voted tie because of my conduct, with bad conduct it against me, how to poison voter?
What that even means?
I become outrageous, because of totally ignoring my argument, and wasting my time.
He was doing it only one sided. And his arguments were just statements which he cannot prove at all and kept repeating them.
Conclusion
this is fcking bull shi9t RFD from a moderator of this website, I want jury against this vote, I want this vote to be remove instantly.
I will complain to head moderator for this vote bomb as its against the rules of the debate and voter giving vote against the rules of debate which is putting BOP on me.
Grow up man
Voter
Con of course counters by not defending the legal status quo, and stating it doesn't go far enough due to development not finishing until around age 25, which implies an abnormality for any large age gaps until the younger has reached that age.
Rebuttal
As I told you the resolution was about normal and normal meant healthy physically and mentally then anything else was secondary.
But lets talk about this statement,
I have already counter that argument, but seems voter has just read only argument from Con not me, he was over smart that I do need to read Pro’s argument to vote for this because I am that much smart. But you are dumb in reality.
The development do not finish till 25 but it goes way beyond 25 till 30 and even further till 50, I have gone in great detail about this argument, but voter read then they can vote justly.
Voter
Pro counters that if you can get the kiddies pregnant, then it's not strange and healthy... WTF?!
WTF, man are you blind? Where did I counter above argument with what you are presenting?
And look at his sentence, kiddies getting pregnant, wtf man, where kids can get pregnant?
Is it possible that a girl becoming pregnant before puberty? Do not overlies and mature at puberty? And produce eggs?
What voter is mentioning is scientific fallacy and against the scientific and medical definition of adult.
Dumbest
Voter
Con wisely refutes: "Being able to physically bear children at such a young age doesn't mean it's ideal or preferable. To confuse the two to be synonymous is laughably absurd. Teenagers give birth to children all the time and it doesn't mean they are old enough to shoulder the burden of responsibility."
Rebuttal
first of all its not the concern of debate as I remain stating before, issue at hand is about the marriage of Aisha (RA), no one can vote on these arguments. Unless they relate to Aisha’s case.
For example we are not talking about responsibilities within marriage. We are talking about physical and mental health. And something normal. She do not have to take any responsibility, which probably could be taking care of husband and child which she did not have.
I do not know which else responsibility he talked about, and it also do not fall under the definition as well.
Its 100% a grown up within marriage is un able to take responsibly related to marriage being lazy and weak or because of a lot of reasons. No matter how you see it, it is totally irrelevant.
Even it was, Con has to explain what he man by responsibility, and how younger one and older one handle marriage differently, he said something does not mean its right. That is how debates work.
Voter
Diet:
Pro, what the heck are you even going on about here? It's somehow normal if a child eats eats cucumbers?
Rebuttal
all dumbs who voted without reading resources even up in same dirty hole, what the heck I am talking check the resources, where I have mentioned what role those things play for growing child.
And dates as well, only 2 foods are mentioned to show that she was given a good nutrition, and good nutrition is key for growing healthy and fast. But a dumb cannot understand it.
Voter
Grooming and Slavery:
Con asserts that child marriage is slavery, and raises the problem of grooming prepubescent girls to deny that agency, and even brings up Stockholm Syndrome.
Rebuttal
that was not the part of debate as I have said above, everything related to those terms was extra info and discussion which I did for preaching, that is why I ignored first argument in my opening argument.
Resolution was normality of marriage and later normally was explained to be the parties being healthy physically and mentally during relationship. Stockholm syndrome can never be proven as there is no evidence of it. Its baseless assertion which cant be proven.
If living with husband happily is considered Stockholm syndrome then every couple is victim of this disorder, because every woman surrender to a man, and there are always clashes between couples. No body can distinguish Stockholm vs normal at all. It seems normal it is normal unless you prove it. Which could only be done if a physician diagnose it. Just like in Jhony depp’s case one physician diagnosed disorder other denied it. This argument will always remain irreverent unless proven which is impossible. Even if it could be proven still if marriage looks normal for any reason it is normal.
Our resolution was to identify it was normal or not normal despite the reason.
I had to prove it was normal which I did and con had to prove it was not. We never debated about the reason at all.
That is why first 2 debaters debated in my favor, other 2 passed but here comes two over smarts.
Voter
Not a Pedo:
Pro defends that Saw waited until she was 6 before expressing interest in her, and she may have started puberty by then... This is whole thing is incredibly strange, even more so being raised by pro, and without first addressing the common phycological damage raised by pro, leaves it most likely quite harmful.
Rebuttal
facepalm,
What are you doing here? From where you get it? I never said that in whole debate. It proves he did not read the debate at all.
Facepalm x3
“ common phycological damage raised by pro”
I am Pro here man, quit taking weeds, please until you are moderator of a debating website.
“leaves it most likely quite harmful.”
how? Are you debater here? You are giving assertion in RFD? Speechless here
Voter
Age of Consent Laws:
Con uses the age and power gap here, to cast strong doubt on free and positive consent.
Rebuttal
you admitted that con castes doubts but cannot prove it.
Con cannot prove anything on his assertions, he had to to bring historical evidence to back all his arguments. And also needed to rebut mine. But he did not do any.
I have proven in my last round that there was no power gap at all, Islam was infant under exile and protection of Insar (people of medina) early era of Islam, Prophet himself was persecuted and migrated to madina, Abu bakr on the other hand father of Aisha (RA) was more stable and was not direct target of non muslim, in fact freed many muslim from the persecution of non muslim.
Although I did not mention this information in debate only that one that it was early islam and Prophet did not have enough power to manipulate anyone. 3 year gab between marriage and consummation Aisha (RA) herself and her family could have evaded it easily. On the other hand I have given example where prophet divorced a woman who asked refuge from him.
Voter
I'm having a hard time understanding the basis for pro's counter logic. Pro at some length argues that in other countries sexual deviants (one of con's counters solidifies this, as it's frowned upon even if legal) target children much older than 9; which /somehow/ means it's good for men in their 50's to not wait so long? 🤮
Rebuttal
Are you dumb? Whenever I mentioned legal age of majority or consent its to deal with the 2nd part of my definition, where a person is adult when he reach legal age of majority, I made point this could not be taken as base for determining maturity, because legal age for majority and consent is diverse even within some state of country like USA. While the scientific definition for maturation is reaching puberty. Which all of you are totally ignoring, I do not know why!!!!!
Look at dumb voter. He is giving me ? In the vote RFD WTF
Voter
what elevates this beyond a foregone conclusion is the "especially for that era" qualifier; meaning that at the time of occurrence such marriages were not strange, and the particular marriage was healthy.
Rebuttal
Probably voter is on weeds, especially for that era where did I say that? I have never taken that stance to related this marriage to history related, or tried to say that it was normal during that time and that is why it was healthy.
That was not the stance of whole debate.
Barney what are you doing man?
Voter
As the BoP rests with pro, no amount of special pleading that maybe this case might have been an exception makes it seem like it was most likely the case, causing him to miss victory by a mile.
Rebuttal
Resolution: Marriage Between Prophet (SAW) and Aisha (RA) was normal.
My stance: Pro
Opponent's stance: Con
BOF: Shared.
Man I am speechless,
I lost whole debate because of my rule of forfeit.
Here its in rules that BOP is shared. And who give you right to change the rules of my debate?
Your whole vote is based on BOF on me, that is why its 100% vote bomb.
I am going to ask jury and report to head moderator for doing such recklessness in voting.
Do you think I shall keep debating and spending that much of time for what? This kind of voting in the end from a moderator of the website?
Its way beyond expectation and understanding.
And its too far being biased.
Voter
Common vs Normal:
Con opens by addressing that frequency of occurrence is a mere red herring to normality (normality being defined as not strange and healthy), and the definitions are not synonymous. He leverages a powerful Nazi Germany example of how the very worst of crimes may be common in a broken society but such does not somehow make pure evil somehow not strange and outright healthy.
Rebuttal
Totally irrelevant argument, Con dropped it and I never touched it, here normal does not mean common but normal meant normal, which later become clear that marriage was healthy and there was no physical and mental harm, as BOD was shared, Con has never proven there was mental and physical harm. Even pedophile and hebephile and child grooming was not related to resolution of debate I did it extra for the sake of preaching to let people know about the full story of marriage.
But dumb people need to have brain to understand it.
One more thing before starting debate I have also mentioned what normal was. There was nothing like that as well in there.
I had to prove that marriage was normal, even it was disorder, which it was not as con could not prove it at all and historically we have seen there was no disorder (stockholm syndrome) with Aisha (RA).
That was irrelevant as well, Con has to prove that marriage was not physically and mentally healthy as BOD was shared.
And he has to rebut my proofs for the marriage was healthy.
While Con did not do anyone only jerking with stupid terms. Which had nothing to do with debate.
Brainless people I am dealing with. Now I have to teach them how to cast votes.
Voter
Without challenge to them being district (???) words for different purposes, pro wholly misses this and without challenging it makes various contentions around such things having happened so therefore it must be normal.
Rebuttal
Marriage is about sex, helping wife in chores, having fun, daily routine tasks, I have already given many links how a marriage can be healthy and normal.
And I have related all those indicators to the life of prophet saw( only a person can see them if he has read the debate)
if normal and healthy married life indicators are not which determines marriage is healthy and normal then what fcking else has to be shown? Damn
-RFD---
Voter
In simple terms this debate boils down to a series of fallacious special pleadings.
Rebuttal
From where voter get it? It is an argument in its own, Con has never mentioned my arguments being the fallacious special pleadings.
Con ignored all my argument never called them fallacious, voter should consider what is already done by debtors, give vote on that basis. That is how votes are done. (I do not understand, am I dealing with children here?)
Voter
Pro is a pedophila apologist, arguing the relationship between Saw and Ra was neither strange nor unhealthy for various exceptions to the status que.
Rebuttal
calling me pedophile apologist is something never found in debate, voter can not use terminology which has not been used in debate.
Otherwise its accusation which was not part of debate.
He has no right to accuse me and put a new argument against me.
Voter has to elaborate it further more, what he mean by this “for various exceptions to the status que”
it seems some biased logic is circulating in his mind against me. He got to convey it to debtor so that we can know the RFD is correct.
Voter
While the very need to go to such lengths to defend it implies strangeness
Rebuttal
Probably that is why you did not read it full, how it is strange? A lengthy argument is strange?
This is weird analogy. If you find is that much strange then why voted? Let it go but do not give biased votes without reading the lengthy arguments.
not at all, why i become toxic in last round? becasue Con totally trolled. and i already know that he cannot win. only a guy like Dthomas can give vote to him not a good judge.
i will show you what was wrong in your RFD.
by the way learn to vote, you got to sumarize everything not give a whole new debate for your RFD. let me finish for barney then i will put light upon your RFD. i have not read it full.
probably i will find something of meaning and maybe accept but i cannot accept from barney as its total shi8t.
And you are thanking them for Vote Bomb? did i have not mentioned in Rules no vote bomb? did i have not mentioned BOF is shared and barney's vote is dependent on that, those two tied vote also biased.
one mentioned i won in argument and gave tie on the basis of conduct.
if you have honor you would call them to reverse their votes, as it break the rule of vote bomb, little remain for the vote of barney i am refuting.
Then i will post, see yourself
The thing is, lancelot instigated a debate with selected judges where he put 4 non muslim and two muslims and 1 left which was barney, then 2 muslim and 3 non muslim and he mentioned a rules where he said a basied vote is allowed.
do you want me to involved with this heck?
that is how you want me to leave this platform?
what are you trying to prove here?
shall i become like Dthomos?
just forum post and bull shi8t arguments with toxicity?
man i am very much disappointed, see yourself what the fck barney has done in his RFD, i will call jury against his vote, and will report to head moderator. if nothing happens i am off from this website. i already got a lot of platforms, the format for debating on DDO i loved from past thought its another good alternative but it sucks.
i am breaking the RFD of barney, your turn is next you can see yourself what have you done.
that is not RFD that is a whole new debate. i think if someone is a good debater does not mean he or she can be good voter, that is why becoming a judge is a big heck of a deal.
last two voters, seems very sleepy when they voted, one cannot read that i mentioned in rule that BOF shared. and other keeps calling me Con in whole of her RFD.
What can you say about the credibility of those votes?
all my rage gone away but i am laughing right now LOL. :))))
So, what I got from Con is, it is not physically or mentally good for someone on the younger side (abuse and grooming), con rebuttals by saying this is not pedophilia.
Bella dear are you alright? why you keep calling me Con in all your RFD?
do not have time to debate with voters, this shit when i faced in DDO i left DDO. but after defending my vote and against votes.
but i think i should do it for the last time i am going to destory these 2 last voters and then delete my account after copying my debate.
As the BoP rests with pro, no amount of special pleading that maybe this case might have been an exception makes it seem like it was most likely the case, causing him to miss victory by a mile.
Seriously?
when you vote you should keep the weeds away.
keep in mind this is not your debate, You had to vote.
what kind of RFD is that?
i even do not want to to read it full.
i know its vote bomb and she is trying so hard to be not look like a pedophile supporter. if you think it can ruin your image you should have not voted at all. but giving this RFD is intellectual dishonesty.
this is new generation of debaters, what a heck, mentioned something does not proves something. con has to prove and relate stockholm syndrome to the Aisha's case. Why voters are not realizing its not their debate, its not their turn to tone and shape the arguments which Con has not presented. why interpreting something which Con himself has not done?
Honest was something i was admiring about west but seems the standard has gone down.
if i break down RFD from both last 2 voters then it would be bad. but i am leaving this place as its very biased. and vote bomb is done by even moderators.
shame
you are giving whole debate a tie because of only conduct? then what is purpose of debate?
i used single vote system because of some reason and the benefit what someone can have is all gone from that system. such a shame and the barney's vote is something of personal baised. DDO had better system where voter said i disagree before debate and disagree after the debate but one wins who use better argument. but he voted on the basis he do not agree after the debate. shame.
i guess 1 vote system exclude conduct, it should be based on only argument. that is why multiple criteria system has conduct point but 1 vote system do not. if you keep dragging conduct point in 1 vote system then why have it its nonsense to have then, keep only multiple criteria system.
With the last vote, i am leaving this forum, thanks a lot. Bye
have rape battle,
touch my bush
Cucumber should be banned.
so-and-so anime character is overpowered.
When a person do not have full picture of history, then he can say that and compare a good man with bad guys. Prophet (SAW) was recently migrated and was not in power.
Abu bakr and Aisha ra also migrated with other Muslims, they could take refuge with non Muslims who were in power. they could not even migrate with prophet, if they wanted.
if Con has presented that argument seriously, i would have responded it as well. there was a extremely beautiful woman whom prophet (SAW) married and other wives ploted agains that wife, as she did not know arabic, they told her to say she seek refuge of Allah against the prophet (SAW). then prophet (SAW) said you seeking refuge from the exalted one, now you can live with me, hence she was divorced on the spot.
you sound Like prophet was of bad character. while every single evidence shows, he (SAW) was not.
what argument you are purposing, i could refute it as well with great length.
TBH, i can write 100s of these pages what i wrote about this topic, the best examples and argument wont stop whatever you say. if anyone of you want debate then tell me, i am here for that.
When someone blocks someone, then it shows there is no concern with each other. rational mad
Do you think it's fun to Debate about this topic? Do you think it's a children's game? Do you think slandering a prophet and His pious wife has no consequences? If you think that way then you are wrong. I have done it properly and in good manner. There is still a lot of information and data to analyze and use in this regard, but i do not feel any need of it right now.
I shall debate on topics which are more pressing, and I have expertise on them as well. Probably Islam vs atheism.
Then why gave tie? You know if I would have gotten justice on that debate I would have accepted mormons debate and this one without hesitation. But I saw biased, that is why I am hesitating.
Even winning this is not big deal.
rational mad man, are you sincere when you're saying it? Or it's just trolling with me?
I have already given names for judges
voting period 6 months.
I will add a bit of my own rules. Some of them you guys are already familiar. But I will it again, why I should be defensive. I have done debate about this topic in great detail. this debate is nothing but to frame me.
even though I am not that easy to be framed. But still with biased votes and arrogant behavior, winner to come looser is not very hard.
david in last debate why not you voted in my favor while you admitted “Though I do appreciate Con and his abilities, but I think he fell short on this one, however Pro's extreme stance and his conduct would make this a tie”
I do not think a conduct should give a tie, because in 1 point system there is no conduct points.
you should have given me argument points.
Con fell short, then why tie?
By saying that, you are trolling me?
By the way, what is the grand plan?
Islam is as simple as Nature. Islam is made up on Nature, we call it fitrah.
Do not try the same approach you do with Christians.
why I am not taking debates any more you wanna know?
Well as I can't wait for your answer so let me tell you any way.
As I said in comment section at the end of my last debate that, I will go on offensive stance, not any more defensive.
I can do this debate easy peasy, and can win even. But why not take a better approach.
The thing is you see anything happens within Islam whether it's in earlier time or even nowadays is with the will of Allah.
If I can prove Islam is true religion and Allah is creator of everything and everything happens with his will and in every process or event there is something good from him. Then it will be easier to convince, that something was destined from Allah to happen in the way it happened. Probably you can call it that grand plan, if you were referring it to be.
In short, if you are a Muslim, it will be easy to make you accept things which seems different for you now.
No matter how much solid argument I present, it won't affect you much, so why not try to convince you in a way I have already mentioned above.
In the last message, I tagged the wrong person.
as rational mad man has blocked me i cant tag him.
By saying that, you are trolling me?
By the way, what is the grand plan?
Islam is as simple as Nature. Islam is made up on Nature, we call it fitrah.
Do not try the same approach you do with Christians.
why I am not taking debates any more you wanna know?
Well as I can't wait for your answer so let me tell you any way.
As I said in comment section at the end of my last debate that, I will go on offensive stance, not any more defensive.
I can do this debate easy peasy, and can win even. But why not take a better approach.
The thing is you see anything happens within Islam whether it's in earlier time or even nowadays is with the will of Allah.
If I can prove Islam is true religion and Allah is creator of everything and everything happens with his will and in every process or event there is something good from him. Then it will be easier to convince, that something was destined from Allah to happen in the way it happened. Probably you can call it that grand plan, if you were referring it to be.
In short, if you are a Muslim, it will be easy to make you accept things which seems different for you now.
No matter how much solid argument I present, it won't affect you much, so why not try to convince you in a way I have already mentioned above.
Word forms: plural ˈchildren
1. an infant; baby
2. an unborn offspring; fetus
3. a boy or girl in the period before puberty
4. a son or daughter; offspring
5.
a. a descendant
b. a member of a tribe, clan, etc.
often used in pl.
children of Israel
6. a person like a child in interests, judgment, etc., or one regarded as immature and childish
7. a person identified with a specified place, time, etc.
a child of the Renaissance
8. a thing that springs from a specified source; product
a child of one's imagination
9. Archaic
childe
10. British, Dialectal
a female infant
i do not know why you want that? i have done whole 5 round debate about it already. and i have made everything clear in it.
its just tard minds who cannot understand.
Increase voting period to 6 months, and increase max words to 30000.
It would be good if you put judges as well.
Inform me names as well.
I do not shit on people, I do it in toilet, believe me LOL
Is it crime to do? If I did mention then what is the big deal?
I was talking with rationalmadman, as he blocked me I can't tag him, simple
If I prove it in private messages, would you change your mind? I guess probably not. I did for barney but no benefit. On the other hand your RFD was very long, I am already tired from that debate and wanted to have rest and give time to my family, that is why I did not want to go in deep with it.
I have no complaint toward you at all so far.
I have found a way to have judges for my debates, problem solved. And slainte, if I lose that means I have weakness in my knowledge, while Islam is perfect. So loosing is what from which you should learn.
But, the votes I call vote bomb, I can prove them here by discussing them in full detail. But I do not want to waste my time on that. Probably I will do debate on this topic again in near future.
Right now I wanted to spend this weekend with my family, let's see when I will do it again, though before that I need to familiarize with some people, I think are honest. And I can make them judges on my debates.
No matter how many times you come, I can defeat you. I can already see how hard you tried to make it tie, and for defeating you will embarrass yourself more.
But I never run from this, I can start another debate when I want and when it will be necessary with whomever I want and whenever I want. Though I have learned one thing, I should choose judges and only choose who are unbiased, and there will be not even single Muslims in it.
Now get rest and I know how much upset you guys are being helpless.
bye and plz do not disturb.
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣀⣠⣤⣀⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⣴⡿⠋⠉⠉⠻⢿⣦⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⢸⣿⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠹⣷⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠈⣿⡄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠸⣷⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣿⠀⠀⢀⣀⣀⣀⣀⣀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢻⣇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣿⣿⡿⠿⠿⠟⠛⠛⠻⢿⣿⣶⣄⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢈⣿⠆⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣀⣠⣤⣤⣤⣤⠀⠈⠻⣿⣇⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣾⡏⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣴⡿⠋⠉⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢹⡿⠀⠀
⠀⠀⣀⣤⣼⣿⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⡟⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣠⣿⣷⣄⠀
⢠⣾⠟⠋⠉⠋⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⣿⣦⣀⣀⣀⣤⣤⣶⣶⠿⠋⠁⢹⣿⡇
⢸⣿⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣴⡟⢉⣿⠋⠉⠉⠉⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⢸⣿⠀
⢸⣿⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣀⣀⣤⣴⠿⠋⠀⠘⣷⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢀⣴⣿⠏⠀
⢸⣿⡄⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠉⠉⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣸⣿⢶⣤⣤⣴⡶⠿⠛⠙⣿⣆⠀
⠈⣿⣇⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⢰⣿⠁⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⣽⣿⠀
⠀⠘⣿⣆⠀⠀⠀⠀⣠⣤⡀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠻⣧⣀⡀⠀⠀⠀⣀⣠⣴⡿⠇⠀
⠀⠀⠘⢿⣿⣦⣤⣴⡿⠻⠿⣷⣦⣤⣤⣤⣴⣾⣿⡿⠿⠿⠿⠟⠛⠉⠀⠀⠀
⠀⠀⠀⠀⠉⢉⣉⠉⠀⠀⠀⠀⠈⠉⠉⠉⠉⠉⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀⠀
i considered the RFD of best.korea the best one, if you consider his vote to be vote bomb, and barney's good one and bellas' as well, then i am out of here, any ways. though i would say honesty is best policy.
i got what is this place like.
i am done with it.
I think there is option to delete account.
all efforts in vain,
other debate you instigated, i will drop that as well.
One more thing though, as Sir.lancelot himself considered the last two votes to be vote bomb, that is enough for me to confirm that they are. If you realize that is a big thing, and why he said that? It is because he wanted to win fair and square.
Any ways, his acknowledgment is a big deal for me.
Thanks, everyone.
On the other hand I am a bit rusty, otherwise on DDO every opponent was forfeiting maximum 3rd round, I should have not left any roam to let people even vote bomb.
i said have fun kids LOL
hahaha, that is what i was going to say but i left it, if RFD would have been good i would say, great job. But in the end it was garbage as well.
well i was reading RFD of bella, man i could not do anything but laugh, hahahahhahaha
so funny.
have fun kids
RationalMadman
6/22/2023, 11:37:40 PM
I am blocking you now as you are annoying me. Lancelot is a snake, bad as a Munafiq. Be careful to trust anything he tells you. There is no rule against helping someone write their RFD, I just happened to not do it.
he wrote this to me,
whatever,
bye bye DA.com
lets see how many more vote bomb
hi,
I want to ask, if you can testify that you have written RFD for barney and also for bellaasp?
Sir.lancelot can also affirm if he agrees or know about it.
Saint*
Any ways, being toxic is not fun, if the environment become like it was on DDO. i had good friends, and here i go i have become bad and only 1 friend request i got so far, that time within little time I got 100s of friends.
let's switch back the saith Tigerlord AKA makhdoom5
sorry to anyone who got toxicity from me, as i am kinda good with Lancelot, which I feel very good about. I hope I can achieve with others too.
Sorry lancy for being rude in debate.
and publish the debate you instigated with me, i want voter to accept the invite as well.
lets have a good debate.
Sorry to all again.
:)
Barney plz provide better RFD.
haven't checked for bella, but i can have discussion with her, do you want it bella? i mean about vote, but let me read first.
Do you see Muslims voting here? if they cannot vote here, then i have done my task, Allah knows best, and he know i have done my part, its their own responsibility at least use brains that much to vote. if they cannot do that then what can i do?
it totally can be seen that, there are biased votes, or vote bombs. i got votes from non Muslim and un biased people. which should be enough to prove that i have done my job.
its their intellectual dishonesty they vote bomb.
if i have to work that much to debate then do another debate with voter, then its better i should go off from this website.
Voter
Saw was sexy:
Pro argues it's not pedophilia if the aggressor is is hot... WTF did I just read?
Rebuttal
you are fcking tard, what I mean there was, if someone say a woman prefer young over old maybe because old is old, then I want to put light upon this issue that prophet did not get old at all, only age was 53 but he remain young till he died. It is miracle.
Voter
But when a brain has filthy poop in it, it only splash poop out from every hole.
Voter
Various off topic rants:
Please stick to the damned topic. There's a comment section for side rants.
Conduct (con):
The comment section is usually off limits but pro truly stepped over the line just before his final argument in what feels like an attempt to poison the well for early voters.
https://www.debateart.com/debates/4533/comments/54727
https://info.debateart.com/terms-of-service/voting-policy#cheating
Conversely, con was impatient at the very start of the debate, and otherwise mostly stayed out of the comment section.
Additionally, pro committed no less than 11 ad hominem attacks in the final round... And damning his own arguments while he's at it, he implies that Islam is good with marrying "adult" girls at the tender age of 8 months...
"Lina Medina started having mensuration at the age of 8 months the extremest case of precocious puberty. But my opponent is dumbest of all, can not see it at all what I have wrote just wasting time with his nonsense."
Rebuttal
one of the debater voted tie because of my conduct, with bad conduct it against me, how to poison voter?
What that even means?
I become outrageous, because of totally ignoring my argument, and wasting my time.
He was doing it only one sided. And his arguments were just statements which he cannot prove at all and kept repeating them.
Conclusion
this is fcking bull shi9t RFD from a moderator of this website, I want jury against this vote, I want this vote to be remove instantly.
I will complain to head moderator for this vote bomb as its against the rules of the debate and voter giving vote against the rules of debate which is putting BOP on me.
Grow up man
Voter
Con of course counters by not defending the legal status quo, and stating it doesn't go far enough due to development not finishing until around age 25, which implies an abnormality for any large age gaps until the younger has reached that age.
Rebuttal
As I told you the resolution was about normal and normal meant healthy physically and mentally then anything else was secondary.
But lets talk about this statement,
I have already counter that argument, but seems voter has just read only argument from Con not me, he was over smart that I do need to read Pro’s argument to vote for this because I am that much smart. But you are dumb in reality.
The development do not finish till 25 but it goes way beyond 25 till 30 and even further till 50, I have gone in great detail about this argument, but voter read then they can vote justly.
Voter
Pro counters that if you can get the kiddies pregnant, then it's not strange and healthy... WTF?!
WTF, man are you blind? Where did I counter above argument with what you are presenting?
And look at his sentence, kiddies getting pregnant, wtf man, where kids can get pregnant?
Is it possible that a girl becoming pregnant before puberty? Do not overlies and mature at puberty? And produce eggs?
What voter is mentioning is scientific fallacy and against the scientific and medical definition of adult.
Dumbest
Voter
Con wisely refutes: "Being able to physically bear children at such a young age doesn't mean it's ideal or preferable. To confuse the two to be synonymous is laughably absurd. Teenagers give birth to children all the time and it doesn't mean they are old enough to shoulder the burden of responsibility."
Rebuttal
first of all its not the concern of debate as I remain stating before, issue at hand is about the marriage of Aisha (RA), no one can vote on these arguments. Unless they relate to Aisha’s case.
For example we are not talking about responsibilities within marriage. We are talking about physical and mental health. And something normal. She do not have to take any responsibility, which probably could be taking care of husband and child which she did not have.
I do not know which else responsibility he talked about, and it also do not fall under the definition as well.
Its 100% a grown up within marriage is un able to take responsibly related to marriage being lazy and weak or because of a lot of reasons. No matter how you see it, it is totally irrelevant.
Even it was, Con has to explain what he man by responsibility, and how younger one and older one handle marriage differently, he said something does not mean its right. That is how debates work.
Voter
Diet:
Pro, what the heck are you even going on about here? It's somehow normal if a child eats eats cucumbers?
Rebuttal
all dumbs who voted without reading resources even up in same dirty hole, what the heck I am talking check the resources, where I have mentioned what role those things play for growing child.
And dates as well, only 2 foods are mentioned to show that she was given a good nutrition, and good nutrition is key for growing healthy and fast. But a dumb cannot understand it.
Voter
Grooming and Slavery:
Con asserts that child marriage is slavery, and raises the problem of grooming prepubescent girls to deny that agency, and even brings up Stockholm Syndrome.
Rebuttal
that was not the part of debate as I have said above, everything related to those terms was extra info and discussion which I did for preaching, that is why I ignored first argument in my opening argument.
Resolution was normality of marriage and later normally was explained to be the parties being healthy physically and mentally during relationship. Stockholm syndrome can never be proven as there is no evidence of it. Its baseless assertion which cant be proven.
If living with husband happily is considered Stockholm syndrome then every couple is victim of this disorder, because every woman surrender to a man, and there are always clashes between couples. No body can distinguish Stockholm vs normal at all. It seems normal it is normal unless you prove it. Which could only be done if a physician diagnose it. Just like in Jhony depp’s case one physician diagnosed disorder other denied it. This argument will always remain irreverent unless proven which is impossible. Even if it could be proven still if marriage looks normal for any reason it is normal.
Our resolution was to identify it was normal or not normal despite the reason.
I had to prove it was normal which I did and con had to prove it was not. We never debated about the reason at all.
That is why first 2 debaters debated in my favor, other 2 passed but here comes two over smarts.
Voter
Not a Pedo:
Pro defends that Saw waited until she was 6 before expressing interest in her, and she may have started puberty by then... This is whole thing is incredibly strange, even more so being raised by pro, and without first addressing the common phycological damage raised by pro, leaves it most likely quite harmful.
Rebuttal
facepalm,
What are you doing here? From where you get it? I never said that in whole debate. It proves he did not read the debate at all.
Facepalm x3
“ common phycological damage raised by pro”
I am Pro here man, quit taking weeds, please until you are moderator of a debating website.
“leaves it most likely quite harmful.”
how? Are you debater here? You are giving assertion in RFD? Speechless here
Voter
Age of Consent Laws:
Con uses the age and power gap here, to cast strong doubt on free and positive consent.
Rebuttal
you admitted that con castes doubts but cannot prove it.
Con cannot prove anything on his assertions, he had to to bring historical evidence to back all his arguments. And also needed to rebut mine. But he did not do any.
I have proven in my last round that there was no power gap at all, Islam was infant under exile and protection of Insar (people of medina) early era of Islam, Prophet himself was persecuted and migrated to madina, Abu bakr on the other hand father of Aisha (RA) was more stable and was not direct target of non muslim, in fact freed many muslim from the persecution of non muslim.
Although I did not mention this information in debate only that one that it was early islam and Prophet did not have enough power to manipulate anyone. 3 year gab between marriage and consummation Aisha (RA) herself and her family could have evaded it easily. On the other hand I have given example where prophet divorced a woman who asked refuge from him.
Voter
I'm having a hard time understanding the basis for pro's counter logic. Pro at some length argues that in other countries sexual deviants (one of con's counters solidifies this, as it's frowned upon even if legal) target children much older than 9; which /somehow/ means it's good for men in their 50's to not wait so long? 🤮
Rebuttal
Are you dumb? Whenever I mentioned legal age of majority or consent its to deal with the 2nd part of my definition, where a person is adult when he reach legal age of majority, I made point this could not be taken as base for determining maturity, because legal age for majority and consent is diverse even within some state of country like USA. While the scientific definition for maturation is reaching puberty. Which all of you are totally ignoring, I do not know why!!!!!
Look at dumb voter. He is giving me ? In the vote RFD WTF
Voter
what elevates this beyond a foregone conclusion is the "especially for that era" qualifier; meaning that at the time of occurrence such marriages were not strange, and the particular marriage was healthy.
Rebuttal
Probably voter is on weeds, especially for that era where did I say that? I have never taken that stance to related this marriage to history related, or tried to say that it was normal during that time and that is why it was healthy.
That was not the stance of whole debate.
Barney what are you doing man?
Voter
As the BoP rests with pro, no amount of special pleading that maybe this case might have been an exception makes it seem like it was most likely the case, causing him to miss victory by a mile.
Rebuttal
Resolution: Marriage Between Prophet (SAW) and Aisha (RA) was normal.
My stance: Pro
Opponent's stance: Con
BOF: Shared.
Man I am speechless,
I lost whole debate because of my rule of forfeit.
Here its in rules that BOP is shared. And who give you right to change the rules of my debate?
Your whole vote is based on BOF on me, that is why its 100% vote bomb.
I am going to ask jury and report to head moderator for doing such recklessness in voting.
Do you think I shall keep debating and spending that much of time for what? This kind of voting in the end from a moderator of the website?
Its way beyond expectation and understanding.
And its too far being biased.
Voter
Common vs Normal:
Con opens by addressing that frequency of occurrence is a mere red herring to normality (normality being defined as not strange and healthy), and the definitions are not synonymous. He leverages a powerful Nazi Germany example of how the very worst of crimes may be common in a broken society but such does not somehow make pure evil somehow not strange and outright healthy.
Rebuttal
Totally irrelevant argument, Con dropped it and I never touched it, here normal does not mean common but normal meant normal, which later become clear that marriage was healthy and there was no physical and mental harm, as BOD was shared, Con has never proven there was mental and physical harm. Even pedophile and hebephile and child grooming was not related to resolution of debate I did it extra for the sake of preaching to let people know about the full story of marriage.
But dumb people need to have brain to understand it.
One more thing before starting debate I have also mentioned what normal was. There was nothing like that as well in there.
I had to prove that marriage was normal, even it was disorder, which it was not as con could not prove it at all and historically we have seen there was no disorder (stockholm syndrome) with Aisha (RA).
That was irrelevant as well, Con has to prove that marriage was not physically and mentally healthy as BOD was shared.
And he has to rebut my proofs for the marriage was healthy.
While Con did not do anyone only jerking with stupid terms. Which had nothing to do with debate.
Brainless people I am dealing with. Now I have to teach them how to cast votes.
Voter
Without challenge to them being district (???) words for different purposes, pro wholly misses this and without challenging it makes various contentions around such things having happened so therefore it must be normal.
Rebuttal
Marriage is about sex, helping wife in chores, having fun, daily routine tasks, I have already given many links how a marriage can be healthy and normal.
And I have related all those indicators to the life of prophet saw( only a person can see them if he has read the debate)
if normal and healthy married life indicators are not which determines marriage is healthy and normal then what fcking else has to be shown? Damn
-RFD---
Voter
In simple terms this debate boils down to a series of fallacious special pleadings.
Rebuttal
From where voter get it? It is an argument in its own, Con has never mentioned my arguments being the fallacious special pleadings.
Con ignored all my argument never called them fallacious, voter should consider what is already done by debtors, give vote on that basis. That is how votes are done. (I do not understand, am I dealing with children here?)
Voter
Pro is a pedophila apologist, arguing the relationship between Saw and Ra was neither strange nor unhealthy for various exceptions to the status que.
Rebuttal
calling me pedophile apologist is something never found in debate, voter can not use terminology which has not been used in debate.
Otherwise its accusation which was not part of debate.
He has no right to accuse me and put a new argument against me.
Voter has to elaborate it further more, what he mean by this “for various exceptions to the status que”
it seems some biased logic is circulating in his mind against me. He got to convey it to debtor so that we can know the RFD is correct.
Voter
While the very need to go to such lengths to defend it implies strangeness
Rebuttal
Probably that is why you did not read it full, how it is strange? A lengthy argument is strange?
This is weird analogy. If you find is that much strange then why voted? Let it go but do not give biased votes without reading the lengthy arguments.
not at all, why i become toxic in last round? becasue Con totally trolled. and i already know that he cannot win. only a guy like Dthomas can give vote to him not a good judge.
i will show you what was wrong in your RFD.
by the way learn to vote, you got to sumarize everything not give a whole new debate for your RFD. let me finish for barney then i will put light upon your RFD. i have not read it full.
probably i will find something of meaning and maybe accept but i cannot accept from barney as its total shi8t.
And you are thanking them for Vote Bomb? did i have not mentioned in Rules no vote bomb? did i have not mentioned BOF is shared and barney's vote is dependent on that, those two tied vote also biased.
one mentioned i won in argument and gave tie on the basis of conduct.
if you have honor you would call them to reverse their votes, as it break the rule of vote bomb, little remain for the vote of barney i am refuting.
Then i will post, see yourself
The thing is, lancelot instigated a debate with selected judges where he put 4 non muslim and two muslims and 1 left which was barney, then 2 muslim and 3 non muslim and he mentioned a rules where he said a basied vote is allowed.
do you want me to involved with this heck?
that is how you want me to leave this platform?
what are you trying to prove here?
shall i become like Dthomos?
just forum post and bull shi8t arguments with toxicity?
man i am very much disappointed, see yourself what the fck barney has done in his RFD, i will call jury against his vote, and will report to head moderator. if nothing happens i am off from this website. i already got a lot of platforms, the format for debating on DDO i loved from past thought its another good alternative but it sucks.
i am breaking the RFD of barney, your turn is next you can see yourself what have you done.
that is not RFD that is a whole new debate. i think if someone is a good debater does not mean he or she can be good voter, that is why becoming a judge is a big heck of a deal.
last two voters, seems very sleepy when they voted, one cannot read that i mentioned in rule that BOF shared. and other keeps calling me Con in whole of her RFD.
What can you say about the credibility of those votes?
all my rage gone away but i am laughing right now LOL. :))))
So, what I got from Con is, it is not physically or mentally good for someone on the younger side (abuse and grooming), con rebuttals by saying this is not pedophilia.
Bella dear are you alright? why you keep calling me Con in all your RFD?
do not have time to debate with voters, this shit when i faced in DDO i left DDO. but after defending my vote and against votes.
but i think i should do it for the last time i am going to destory these 2 last voters and then delete my account after copying my debate.
As the BoP rests with pro, no amount of special pleading that maybe this case might have been an exception makes it seem like it was most likely the case, causing him to miss victory by a mile.
Seriously?
when you vote you should keep the weeds away.
keep in mind this is not your debate, You had to vote.
what kind of RFD is that?
i even do not want to to read it full.
i know its vote bomb and she is trying so hard to be not look like a pedophile supporter. if you think it can ruin your image you should have not voted at all. but giving this RFD is intellectual dishonesty.
this is new generation of debaters, what a heck, mentioned something does not proves something. con has to prove and relate stockholm syndrome to the Aisha's case. Why voters are not realizing its not their debate, its not their turn to tone and shape the arguments which Con has not presented. why interpreting something which Con himself has not done?
Honest was something i was admiring about west but seems the standard has gone down.
if i break down RFD from both last 2 voters then it would be bad. but i am leaving this place as its very biased. and vote bomb is done by even moderators.
shame
if i prove your vote is vote bomb would you reverse it?
you are giving whole debate a tie because of only conduct? then what is purpose of debate?
i used single vote system because of some reason and the benefit what someone can have is all gone from that system. such a shame and the barney's vote is something of personal baised. DDO had better system where voter said i disagree before debate and disagree after the debate but one wins who use better argument. but he voted on the basis he do not agree after the debate. shame.
i guess 1 vote system exclude conduct, it should be based on only argument. that is why multiple criteria system has conduct point but 1 vote system do not. if you keep dragging conduct point in 1 vote system then why have it its nonsense to have then, keep only multiple criteria system.
a fcking voter become that much emotional to use vomit smiley in RFD? what i am lookin at.
a vote bomb from a moderator!!!!!
With the last vote, i am leaving this forum, thanks a lot. Bye
have rape battle,
touch my bush
Cucumber should be banned.
so-and-so anime character is overpowered.
When a person do not have full picture of history, then he can say that and compare a good man with bad guys. Prophet (SAW) was recently migrated and was not in power.
Abu bakr and Aisha ra also migrated with other Muslims, they could take refuge with non Muslims who were in power. they could not even migrate with prophet, if they wanted.
if Con has presented that argument seriously, i would have responded it as well. there was a extremely beautiful woman whom prophet (SAW) married and other wives ploted agains that wife, as she did not know arabic, they told her to say she seek refuge of Allah against the prophet (SAW). then prophet (SAW) said you seeking refuge from the exalted one, now you can live with me, hence she was divorced on the spot.
you sound Like prophet was of bad character. while every single evidence shows, he (SAW) was not.
what argument you are purposing, i could refute it as well with great length.
TBH, i can write 100s of these pages what i wrote about this topic, the best examples and argument wont stop whatever you say. if anyone of you want debate then tell me, i am here for that.
Thanks for voting, hard work paid off. :)
I will work on my conduct next time. Sorry for that.