reSee.it - Related Video Feed

Speaker 0: Andrew was the brother of Peter. He was a fisherman, and two had to pay taxes besides Jesus, but I might be mistaken here. Speaker 1: I will reconfirm that it is only Peter and Jesus that paid the tax for adults, and I will reconfirm that the other disciples were apprentices in their family's business and were therefore young as well. All of them were 12 and 15 years old, and I'll stand by that, which poses a lot of other questions. If it's the middle of the night and I walk into the wrong house and I see a 30-year-old man washing the feet of an unknown 12-year-old boy, what am I gonna do? I'm going to jail, guys. Think about these questions because it's not the version we've been told. When you redo the story with their ages in mind, it's a darker picture. Speaker 0: That’s really up for debate. If you apply modern-day Jewish disciples in halakhic schools, you might come to that conclusion. Times then were different. Speaker 1: Actually, scholars—look, I just did an article specifically on this, I have all the receipts. Scholars all agree that the age for discipleship within rabbinical circles was 12 to 15 years old. You could Google it. And, again, the only two people that paid taxes were Peter and Jesus. None of the other ones paid taxes and therefore were not adults. It’s in the scripture. Who cares if they're adults? It doesn't matter. Speaker 2: It’s about being a pedophile. Speaker 1: It’s not; it’s not taken out of context. Speaker 0: Peter, Andrew, James, and John were fishermen, right? Peter was already married; Jesus healed his mother-in-law. He was probably the oldest, mid-20s or 30s. The general consensus is Peter is mid-20s to 30s. John is 15 to 20, the youngest. James, late teens to early 20s. Andrew and Philip, late teens. Matthew, early to mid-20s. The others, Thomas and Judas, mostly teens to early 20s. I’m not sure you’ve seen 16-year-old teenagers like fifty years ago; they were men. It’s a different picture today. So I don’t buy the Jesus was a pedophile claim. Speaker 2: CQ Radio does the same bullshit. Try to make him a pedo. Speaker 1: It’s all about mystery rites and excretion from children in their mystery practices. Like adrenaline, they use children as a sacrament to open the veil. That’s what’s going on with the elites today—the Vatican, Israel, and all the elites. The Bible is a PG version. Wake up and stop attacking me because I’m telling the truth, especially if you don’t have the balls to research it yourself. Speaker 0: What the fuck was that? I’m not attacking you. You can have your own opinion. The general consensus of scholars on the Bible was what I just read—the estimated ages. The youngest were Jesus’ direct family, cousins. Speaker 2: CK will do the same thing—bring up the kid at the Last Supper, and he was doing it. It hinges on a false interpretation of one word. Speaker 1: Arts, magic, occult have two sides: black magic uses trauma, fear, and control to harvest from children; white magic uses unity and consent. They both conjure the same entities. One is loving, one is painful. Look at the ages of the disciples: 12 to 15. Only Peter and Jesus paid the toll; the others were not adults. Speaker 2: Quick question: who do you think is God? What is good in the world according to your worldview? Speaker 1: There is a loving creator. That has nothing to do with what I said. If you equate Jesus with God, that’s a you problem. Speaker 2: Are you going to say what you actually believe? Speaker 1: Move on. There’s a loving creator who created us in his image and loves us. Speaker 3: There’s been a lot of indoctrination of children recently. The biggest discussion is wars. Speaker 1: You can give us a little more. Speaker 3: They’re doxxing this kid. People know. Speaker 1: I’m an alpha warrior. Speaker 0: I have to check the Mossad Media Matrix. Speaker 3: Grandma gave him permission. It’s not going to end well. Speaker 1: I’ll be listening. Somebody can go listen there or you could hide on my page as a handle. You’ll be on my team, though. Speaker 4: Veritas suggested forgiving the heretic, but I don’t think it’s ours to forgive. It’s hubris to think that. We’re trying to have an open debate, but disrespectful behavior isn’t acceptable. Speaker 1: I didn’t mean to be disrespectful. Speaker 4: We can wrestle with scripture without ad hominem. You’re okay to say Muhammad’s a better approximation, but that’s a different topic. Speaker 1: Start by looking into the ages of the disciples. Thank you. Speaker 2: The real concern is elsewhere. Veritas has gone over that research and it suggests the opposite.

Speaker 0 argues that the real risk in the US isn’t multiculturalism itself, but the influence of a multibillionaire who runs the largest social media platform in the world, which has become an echo chamber for “your ridiculous ideology.” He asserts that the UK public, and especially someone raised in multicultural, working-class Birmingham, should recognize that “there’s not a Muslim there who’s read the Quran and went, oh, you know what? I didn’t rule out sexual violence, so I might I might just crack on with that.” He questions the other speaker’s perspective, implying a disconnect from reality or a failing to understand religious studies, and suggests that the other person would benefit from taking a course in religious studies before continuing the discussion. Speaker 1 responds by dismissing the previous remarks as ad hominem attacks, suggesting that the argument is weak and implying the opposite side should still be able to present a strong case. He asserts that the young working-class girls who grew up in similar areas would beg to differ with the other speaker’s view. He states that he has read the Quran and, regardless of whether his interpretation is accepted by the other party, points to countries with significant issues related to child brides and the rape of young girls and children, arguing that this is a systemic cultural problem associated with Islam rather than something confined to the West. He further contends that the grooming gang phenomenon “is what contained primarily to Muslim men,” and he adds that it “really only started when you started seeing mass migrate,” tying the issue to migration patterns. In sum, Speaker 0 frames the conversation around the risk posed by a powerful social media platform shaping public discourse, tying concerns to multiculturalism and warning of insufficient religious literacy; he challenges the other speaker to engage with religious studies. Speaker 1 counters with personal experience and interpretation of religious texts, arguing that the sexual violence and grooming issues reflect a broader systemic cultural problem linked to Islam, which he claims has emerged in connection with mass migration and is not limited to Western contexts.

Most of us feel uncomfortable about pedophiles, but we must separate feelings from actions. We should treat them with respect, acknowledging they did not choose their sexuality. Pedophilia is a sexual preference, not a choice. Trying to eliminate them from society is impractical and unfair, as it is a biological aspect that cannot be changed. New individuals are born with this orientation daily, and they have not committed any wrongdoing.

Good evening, everyone. After exposing disturbing content in Imam Khomeini's writings, some have denied these claims. I present evidence from his book on Sharia Law, published in Iran. It states that sexual penetration of a wife is not permissible until she is nine years old. However, it permits other forms of sexual pleasure with underage girls, including newborns. There are no legal consequences for rapists if the victim is under nine; they only face a minor sin. If a girl is harmed to the point of severe injury, the rapist must provide financial compensation. This text dehumanizes young girls, allowing for their exploitation. Imam Khomeini's teachings are deeply troubling.

In Islamic law, once a girl shows signs of physical maturity, it is permissible for her husband to consummate the marriage. Precocious puberty refers to starting puberty unusually early. Islam does not prevent a man from marrying a 5-year-old who has started precocious puberty, but it does not mean that sex is allowed at such a young age. If a 5-year-old girl shows signs of physical maturity, her marriage can be consummated. However, it is important to note that this is biologically impossible as precocious puberty can start as early as 11 months. Islamic marriages involving young children are arranged by parents.

Children can begin to understand differences in gender at a young age. Some figure out their gender identity early on, which may not align with their assigned sex at birth. The assumption that a child is definitively male or female based solely on their genitals is incorrect.

In Babylon, sexual perversion was common. The Talmud endorses marrying 3-year-old girls, with respected rabbis like Simeon Ben Yohai supporting it. Ben Yohai said a man can have intercourse with a young girl, comparing it to putting a finger in the eye. The Talmud also mentions sexual activity with small boys.

The speaker argues that the Quran does not explicitly forbid sexual intercourse with 5-year-olds. They point out that a verse in Suratul Talaq mentions divorce and states that it is permissible to divorce those who have never been pubescent. However, the speaker emphasizes that this verse does not mention puberty as a requirement for marriage or sexual intercourse. They challenge anyone to find a verse in the Quran that explicitly prohibits marrying or having sexual intercourse with prepubescent individuals. The speaker concludes that without such a verse, it can be interpreted as permissible. They criticize this interpretation as promoting pedophilia and severe wife abuse.

Most of us feel discomfort towards pedophiles, but we must separate feelings from actions. We should treat them with respect, understanding they did not choose their sexuality. Some individuals struggle with pedophilic feelings in silence due to fear of hatred. It is crucial to recognize that pedophilia is a sexual orientation that cannot be changed. Trying to eliminate these individuals from society is impractical and unjust, as they have not committed any wrongdoing.

At a young age, when someone touches your genitals, it can feel pleasurable even if you don't understand what it is. Some may argue that it's sexual assault, but I've always maintained that if the abuser is skilled, you may not even realize it's happening. The abuser can make you feel a certain way without you even knowing it.

Pedophiles should be treated with respect and understanding, as they do not choose their feelings or sexual orientation. It is our responsibility to overcome our negative emotions towards them and acknowledge that they cannot freely act on their desires. Statistics show that there are individuals struggling with pedophilic interests who fear being hated if they speak up. While it may be emotionally challenging to accept, pedophilia is a biological aspect that cannot be changed. Trying to eliminate these individuals from society is impractical, especially considering that new people are born with the same difficulty every day. It is important to note that pedophiles have not committed any wrongdoing.

In Islam, marrying a 100-year-old woman may cause harm, but marrying a developed 13-year-old may not. The speaker believes it's about avoiding harm in relationships. They mention the legality of marrying older vs. younger individuals in different countries, emphasizing the relative nature of pedophilia.

Speaker 0 stated that forced child marriage should be supported and that the age of consent is absurd. They believe a woman is never capable of consent and should be forcibly married after her first menstruation. Speaker 1 said young men and women should be groomed for marriage because they become sexually mature in adolescence. He stated that he wants a 16-year-old wife and that the age of consent should be much lower, as he doesn't believe in the concept. He claimed that marriage is consent, and there is no such thing as marital rape because marriage implies a constant obligation to provide sex on demand, which is the only moral way to have sex.

We should strive to understand the cultural significance of cousin marriages, which are accepted by 35 to 50% of sub-Saharan African populations and are common in the Middle East and South Asia. Many view these marriages positively, as they strengthen family bonds and provide financial stability. However, there are health risks for children, particularly those born out of wedlock. Instead of stigmatizing cousin marriages, we should promote advanced genetic screening for couples, as practiced in Gulf Arab countries, and implement health education programs in communities where these marriages are prevalent. A more constructive approach is needed to address the challenges associated with first cousin marriages.

The speaker argues against the criticism of marrying young girls by stating that Ayesha Abdul Alain was physically mature at age 9, unlike those who molest children. They claim that when a girl goes through puberty, she is ready for marriage, as seen in various societies throughout history. The speaker suggests that modern society's abolition of minor marriage has led to increased sexual activity among young girls. They believe that Islam and following the example of the prophet can prevent child molestation and rape.

A 40-year-old man should not be interested in a 15-year-old girl. There is a debate about the legal age of consent and the age at which a young woman can choose her sexuality. Personally, as a father of four daughters, if one of my 15-year-old daughters dated a 45-year-old man, it would be a concern for me. It makes me reflect on the unequal power dynamics between a 14-15-year-old boy and a 39-40-year-old woman. I have no shame in admitting this and encourage you to think about it.

A man in his forties discusses the moral implications of a 15-year-old girl being involved with an older man. He acknowledges the debate surrounding the legal age of consent and emphasizes that everyone has different moral standards. He mentions that the law applies to everyone and briefly mentions that the legal age of consent allows a girl to choose her sexuality from the age of 15. Another speaker agrees with the man's point and adds that relationships between young boys and older women are also unequal. The conversation ends with the acknowledgment that the topic is not trivial.

In a perfect world, each community and caregiver would decide if a child is ready to consent to sex based on factors like behavior, job, education, and cognitive ability. It's important to consider the individual's history of abuse as well. In an end cap society, if someone engages in a relationship that isn't agreed upon by the community, they must accept the consequences. It's crucial to respect different cultures, but also acknowledge that child sexual abuse and trafficking could decrease if communities were more involved in their children's lives. The government's handling of these issues is seen as inadequate, and some minors may be more prepared for sexual activity with adults than others. Age limits are typically set based on life expectancy, which varies across countries.

Muhammad married Aisha when she was 6 years old and lived with her when she turned 9. At that age, after she began menstruating, they engaged in a sexual relationship. The discussion centers on the perception of Aisha's maturity, with the argument that she was physically developed and capable of bearing children, which some may view as an indication of adulthood. However, the perspective that a 9-year-old is still a child raises ethical concerns regarding such relationships.

Muhammad married Aisha when she was 6 years old and they began living together when she was 9. At that age, she had reached physical maturity, which was recognized by her parents. There is a discussion about the perception of a 9-year-old as a child versus an adult. One perspective argues that by 9, she had entered a new stage of life, being physically developed and capable of marriage and motherhood. The conversation highlights differing views on maturity and readiness for marriage at a young age.

There is a default setting for humans regarding male and female, but it's important to recognize that not everyone fits into this binary. While we should compassionately support those who don't conform, we also need to acknowledge biological realities. Children often lack the understanding to navigate these complex issues, and no parent desires to face such difficult choices. The perception of being transgender may seem trendy today, but it's not a choice made lightly. The prevalence of gender identity issues can vary by location, potentially influenced by societal acceptance or suppression. This phenomenon can be likened to the historical suppression of left-handedness, which increased once society accepted it as normal.

The speaker asserts that the age of consent is a feminist social construct. They question why people are upset about someone being 17 rather than 18, noting that in Florida the age of consent is 18, while in Illinois it is 17 and in other states it is 16, with variation across countries and states. They point out that when the age of consent is 18 in Florida, dating somebody a year younger is framed as “the worst thing possible,” highlighting how perceptions shift with different statutory ages. The speaker then contends that age of consent is, at its core, about the age at which an adult can consent, and asks, “Do we really believe that you have to be 18 years old in order to consent to sex, otherwise it's rape?” They challenge the notion that adults who are past puberty cannot engage in relationships without it being deemed rape, suggesting a critical view of the rigidity around consent age. In terms of the broader purpose of the age of consent, the speaker offers a provocative interpretation: “What I think age of consent is about is really, … what it's really about is artificially increasing the sexual marketplace value of older women.” They emphasize that this is not presented as a new idea but as a conclusion they have discussed before on the show. The overall argument centers on questioning the universality and motives behind fixed consent ages, contrasting state-by-state differences and scrutinizing the social and market implications they believe are embedded in the concept of consent.

Speaker 0 argues that the age of consent should be lowered and challenges the very concept itself by tying consent to marriage. They claim marriage equates to ongoing consent, stating that “marriage is consent” and that there is “no such thing as marital rape” because when you marry a person, you have a “marital obligation to give your spouse sex whenever they want it.” They assert this is “literally Catholic doctrine,” and that “the only moral way to have sex is within marriage.” They go further to claim that “the only way to get married is to consent to sex on demand, and both partners agree to that,” and that denying it is a “mortal sin.” They summarize this as their position on consent theory and label it as their version of the age of consent. They insist the distinction is not “age of consent” but “age of marriage,” challenging the concept of an age threshold for sexual activity. They question the concept itself, remarking, “What is this? Christians have no use for such things,” adding, “Christians have no use for such a concept.” They describe a Christian sexual ethic as one where “you get married,” and “a Christian doesn’t have sex with anybody,” but rather “has sex with their spouse within marriage,” and they assert that “nobody’s getting married at a pre pubescent age.” The speaker then asserts that people “get married when they’re at a reproductive age, when they’re adolescents,” indicating they are redefining the concept of marriage timing. Overall, the statements present a view that marriage is the framework for sexual consent, that marital obligations govern sexual activity, and that Christian doctrine underpins this approach, while challenging conventional notions of age limits and the feasibility of premarital sex.

In this video, the speaker discusses the topic of sexual intercourse with young children. They argue that the Quran does not explicitly forbid it, citing a verse that mentions divorce and the absence of puberty. The speaker challenges the audience to find a verse in the Quran that prohibits marrying or having sexual intercourse with young children based on harm or puberty. They conclude that, according to the Quran alone, it is permissible to engage in sexual intercourse with 5-year-olds. The speaker suggests that this perspective supports pedophilia and severe wife abuse.

Younger girls, like 13-year-olds, are often targeted because older girls, around 18 or 19, are more discerning and less vulnerable. There's a perception that younger girls can be exploited for financial gain, as they are seen as more valuable due to their perceived innocence and virginity. This exploitation is driven by the idea that older individuals can derive pleasure from younger girls, who are often viewed as easier to manipulate.