8-year-old Saudi girl divorces 50-year-old husband

So basicly you claim that almost all of our ancestors were sick pedos? Is that what are you saying? How so? How is it possible that so many people were sick?

Actually it isn't. Nobody sane saying that raping children isn't crime but what you are try to convince me is that same rules could be applied from whole history of mankind. Well, seeing how you avoid answer questions about WWII and were leaders of your country back them war criminals you are very well aware of that.
Go ahead and apply today's morality to the things in the past but not only with things related to religion and you'll see that something like that is impossible.

 

No, that was your claim. My claim is that anyone who has sex with a child is a paedophile, Regardless if im descended from them, regardless how long ago it occurred and certainly regardless of how many of them done it.

So what is the difference between raping a kid 1500 years ago and raping one now? Not the difference in how we see it, the difference in the actual act.

And, if mohammad did have sex with a child, how can he not be a paedophile?
Noun 1. paedophile - an adult who is sexually attracted to children

 

So basicly you don't know much about history, don't you?
So what's the point of disscusing the matter with you if you don't know what are you talking about?
Here's one piece for yor you to chew up: teen mariage
You should read something about history of marriage so start here: marriage
Read something and than get back to me.

So what's the problem with answering questions about WWII? Why do you avoid them yet you expect from me to answer your questions?
Answer questions I've asked and I will be glad to answer all your questions. It's not like I am scared to say what I really mean as you can see so far.,

 

It could be worse. You could be in my shoes, having to have a discussion with someone who has the grammatical proficiency of a lolcat. Don't you has cheeseburger?

I'm not denying that at various stages through history people have raped children.

I'll repeat myself one more time, try especially hard to grasp this simple concept. Anyone who has sex with a child is a paedophile, Regardless if I'm descended from them, regardless how long ago it occurred and certainly regardless of how many of them done it.

I'll rephrase it to give you a better chance of understanding a simple sentence written in plain English. It doesn't matter how many times through history it occurred, it doesn't matter how many different groups done it and it doesn't matter how long ago it happened. Any adult who has sex with a child is a paedophile. A claim you have failed to refute even though you have been directly asked to.

I didn't answer because it's irrelevant, deceitful subterfuge designed to give you an excuse to go off talking about something completely different. But i'll humour you. If people committed crimes in WW2 they would be, by definition, war criminals and i would be against any action, even if it was committed 70 years ago, which i now find immoral or unethical.

Now, back to the point. How can someone who had sex with a child not be a paedophile? Answer it, now.

 

So,again, basicly you claim that majority of our ancestors were child rapist?
But how is that possible? How is ti possible that majority of them were sick?
If it's that simple as you like to show it please enlight us all.

Again you avoid answering direct question... Why? Is it hard to answer it?
And how come my question be irrelevant if my claim was that you can't apply todays moral values to that time?
You keep avoiding answer because you would loose argument. Only the blind one can't see it here.

 

If they had sex with children then yes they were. I, and you, have no way of knowing which individuals had sex with children and who their descendants are. But i have said, countless times, that ANYONE who had sex with a child is, by definition, a paedophile. Are you going to have a shot at understanding this simple point or are you going to just ignore it again?

I clearly answered your question. I answered it directly. Now answer mine.

How can someone who had sex with a child not be a paedophile?

 

So define than child: can child have child on their own?

Actullay you didn't answer my direct question: where leaders of your country during WWII war criminals?

 

A child is generally defined as someone between birth and around 11/12. After that they become an adolescent and then later an adult.

I don't really know what you mean by "can child have child on their own". besides the sentence being a grammatical abomination it's also a biological impossibility for any mammal to procreate "on their own". try writing like an adult and maybe we can get through this a lot quicker.

Now, how can someone who has sex with a child not be a paedophile?

If they committed war crimes then yes they were. if you want to give me specific instances of some of the billions of events which occurred during the war i can address each incident one by one. But just so you know, no amount of deceit, continually asking the same facile question or subterfuge is going to get you out of answering my questions. I'll keep asking it until you either answer it, or run away.