Yuvithegod

A commonly held sentiment, amongst both the religious and non-religious (such as Jordan Peterson¹), is that the morality from Abrahamic religions is good and thus should be preached and followed, even if they don't believe in the religion itself.

¹ "Christian Atheist"

My counterpoint is simple. We can obviously all agree that pedophilic acts is immoral, in fact the vast majority of people would agree with such.

However, there is a large population of Muslims who believe that it can be morally permissable for an adult to have sex with a 9 year old (or/and older) girl.

Why do they believe this?

Because their Prophet Muhammad had sex with (raped) a 9 year old (consummation of marriage

Truthfully, I have always been confused by the idea of "NoFap". It's obvious that any possible addiction does not stem from masturbation itself, but from porn, thus the term "NoFap" is a misonomer.

I've always felt like the term "NoFap" unnecessarily demonises masturbation instead of the root cause - pornography.

And even then, there's many people who can watch pornography without being addicted - so why do some of you act as if (project that) everyone is as addicted, or as susceptible to addiction, as you?

It's like a (recovering) alcoholic shitting on someone for drinking in moderation and calling them addicted.

The destruction and denazification of WW2 Germany has led to a great culture where they admit to their historic atrocities and sincerely apologise.

Japan, on the other hand, based on numerous comments from the surge in right-wing politicians, seems to have not adopted such a mindset, and are largely revisionist or ignorant on the matter of Imperial Japan's atrocities during WW2.

The truth is that the nukes were justified, and were not significantly worse than existing bombings like the firebombing of Tokyo. I believe that:

1. Had Japan been nuked more, they would not be so revisionist as they are now. They should've been forced to bow their heads.

2. The primary source for the existing

The term pedophile itself simply means someone who has a sexual attraction to minors. However, the term "pedophile" has also been conflated with "child sex offenders". This also plays into why some people wish to use the term "Minor Attracted Person", while I disagree with this term, as it almost normalises pedophillic relationships, which are inherently immoral, I agree that there is a lot of stigma tied to the term "pedophile".

Society's refusal to morally distinguish between a non-offending pedophile and an actual child sex offender leads to prejudice and harm against innocent people who have done nothing wrong. While you may not particularly care about the feelings of non-offending

Many muslims within the muslim community enjoy mocking and insulting liberals, especially insulting liberals blindly tolerating everything. This is common among the Right anyway. Edit: Actually, all sides love mocking or insulting liberals/centrists, though obviously for differing reasons.

While I agree liberals tend to tolerate intolerance, do the muslims doing this not realise that Islam itself is one of those things that liberals tolerate and defend illogically?

Without center-left liberals, which other non-muslim political group actually supports or even likes islam? While I agree liberals are too lenient, why do muslims care, when they're the ones benefitting from the existence of li

Unsure if im remembering this correctly, could've been on r/rage or r/legaladvice or even r/aita.

Essentially, a random woman claimed his kid (daughter?) Was hers, the key point was that a bunch of strangers took her side and beat him up, with one of them bruising(?) or damaging his ribs. It stopped when his wife arrived and cleared up the situation.