Muhammad was a pedo
Muhammad was a pedo
I know we like to see things as black and white.
But stuff is nuanced.
We are talking about 1400 years ago. What was the norm in those times and how different is this from those norms? Were the things being preached better than the norms? If so, I think that’s progress.
Right now, average age of marriage has been going up and is early 30s in the US. About a 100 years ago, it was early 20s/late teens. In some states the official age didn’t get part mid teens till recently.
With that in mind, should we be judging the people of 1920s as advocates of child marriages?
Slavery was accepted back in the day and today we think it's horrible. Should we be judging the slave owners of the 1800s as advocates for slavery?
This is a rhetorical question, the answer is yes. The same applies to a religion that promotes pedophiles.
This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.
Source: U.S. Constitution, article VI, paragraph 2
Passed by Congress January 31, 1865. Ratified December 6, 1865.
…
Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
Source: U.S. Constitution, amendment XIII, section 1 (along with the note above that section stating the date it was passed and ratified)
Slavery in the US was outlawed in 1865. Corrupt assholes breaking laws doesn’t mean those laws aren’t in effect, it just means they’re criminals.

Note: The following text is a transcription of the Constitution as it was inscribed by Jacob Shallus on parchment (the document on display in the Rotunda at the National Archives Museum). The spelling and punctuation reflect the original.
This isn’t wrong, but it never had any sort of effect on debt bondage.
Debt bondage, also known as debt slavery, bonded labour, or peonage, is the pledge of a person’s services as security for the repayment for a debt or other obligation. Where the terms of the repayment are not clearly or reasonably stated, the person who holds the debt has thus some control over the laborer, whose freedom depends on the undefined debt repayment.
The problem here is that the U.S. had black codes and Jim Crow laws, things created specifically to target black people. These by and large restricted black people from owning property, marry freely, enter contracts, testify in court against white people, speaking too loudly in the presence of a white woman.
Breaking these meant that the person in question would be tried and convicted, thus entering debt. A white person could then buy this debt, and the black person would have to “work off” this debt for an indeterminate amount of time.
This was in place for a very long time, and wasn’t overturned until 1941 when the office of the attorney general issued circular 3591, classifying debt peonage as slavery. They did this because the FDR administration was worried that the enemies would use the American treatment of black people against them in a propaganda war.
Classification 50 was established in 1921 as one of the original classifications adopted by the Bureau from the Department of Justice filing system. Cases filed in the classification are investigated under the 13th Amendment to the U.S. constitution and various provisions of U.S. Code Title 18. Violations include holding or returning a person to peonage, enticement into slavery, sale into servitude, deprivation of rights under color of low, and conspiracy to violate the rights of citizens. Prior to 1942 the classification was titled "Peonage," and U.S.