I wonder, don't you feel all over just how wrong you are. You have, in order to defend islam, defended :

1) raping 6 year old girls (apparently it's okay if "he did not do anything outside the norm of that time")

2) massacring (I guess this was the norm of the time too ?)

3) stoning (funny how the hadith mentions that this actually wasn't the norm at the time ...)

4) forcing other people to stone women

At what point is one absolutely certain islam is disgusting and despicable ? I'd go with 1), why don't you share your opinion.

I also wonder. If there is one thing islam promises more than anything else, it's that the caliph will win any war, any battle. But today, we know that over 4 caliphs were murdered, and the last one died without a successor after being deposed by Kemal Ataturk. Where is the victory, because I see mostly a hell of a lot of defeats. And of course, even in islamic history itself there are reports of the prophet getting his ass kicked in battle. The last islamic state is extinct, and even the pseudo-islamic states only live by the grace of infidels. Where is allah's promise ? Where is the victory ? Why are you so pathetic ?

> it is explicitly talking about the Messengers, Scholars, and Rabbis, who were upholding ...

By the way, I take it you agree on the validity of the fatwa that it is haram for muslims to not live in the state of the caliph ? You focus on supposed disagreement on the punishment sharia demands for denying islam's laws, and you're making ever more idiotic arguments, but you're curiously silent on the issue.

As I recall you were initially trying to defend that muslims always follow sharia, and yet ... Every single muslim on the planet obviously violates this fatwa, as there is no exception for not having a single islamic state lead by a caliph. Why don't you come up with some more moronic arguments about this issue ?

> Again, put your citation as to who are these "highest religious authorities in Saudi Arabia", and what exactly they said.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/progressivesecularhumanist/2015...

Repeated from article : For example, in 2011, Dr. Salih bin Fawzan, a prominent cleric and member of Saudi Arabia’s highest religious council, issued a fatwa asserting that there is no minimum age for marriage and that girls can be married “even if they are in the cradle.”

Which is also why you might want to google "thighing". Your religion is truly ugly and disgusting if it lets this happen. They defend this as moral and just. Raping babies. You must feel proud.

> If you read the incident, it is saying that those two Jews themselves accepted what was mentioned in the Torah. Even today, you will find the same penalty in the Torah.

Why don't you comment on the obvious fact that they were honorable and moral by NOT following that law, and then muhammad forced them to do it ... After which the Jew being executed used his own body simply to try to protect and lessen the pain of his companion while your paedophile prophet was murdering them.

We both know which of them deserves respect and admiration, and it's that Jew.

Note that you skirt around the issue of stoning for even suspected adultery. Do you think that's moral ? If not, why does islam say so ?

> Aishah is one of the highest regarded sources from whom to take Hadith and religion.

I take it you are a sunni then ? Because this is not at all true in general. Shi'a 'hate" her, or perhaps it'd be better to say that they act like she doesn't exist, because of the agreement between Abu Bakr and Muhammad about selling her to the paedophile prophet for "rape and later marriage" (why, btw, does the prophet get to have sex before marriage ? Care to explain ?) in trade for inheriting the islamic empire. This is the root of the sunni-shi'a conflict of course but you're still presenting the moronically stupid argument that he was elected (and then proceeded to immediately to massacre former parts of the muslim army in what is called the "apostasy wars").

Do you seriously believe that ?