In the ISIS guide, one question asks: ‘Is it permissible to have intercourse with a female slave who has not reached puberty?’ The response is: ‘It is permissible to have intercourse with the female slave who hasn’t reached puberty if she is fit for intercourse.’
Another asks: ‘Is it permissible to sell a female captive?’ The response is: ‘It is permissible to buy, sell, or give as a gift female captives and slaves, for they are merely property, which can be disposed of.’ The document says that all ‘unbelieving’ women, including Jews and Christians, can be taken as captives and sold as slaves. The pamphlet allows masters to beat their female slaves, but only as a disciplinary measure, and not as a source of gratification. The master is also forbidden from beating his slave-girl on the face.
The IS price list for slaves ranks the cost of a woman by age, so while a woman aged 40-50 would sell for just 50,000 dinars or $43, a girl aged 10-20 would be worth 150,000 dinars ($125) and a child under nine would sell for 200,000 dinars ($166).
For once, I quite agree with the substance of her commentary. And in this case, I even think her harsh word choice should be admitted:
"ISIS is doing everything exactly what Muhammad did. Muhammad killed non-Muslims,non-believers, apostates,captured non-Muslim girls and fucking them. He fucked female slaves. He fucked a child. Islam says if you want to be a good Muslim, follow Muhammad’s lifestyle, do everything what Muhammad did."
This is why I am not a pacifist. Jesus said, "Turn the other cheek." I think that's your own cheek, the one on your face. I don't think Jesus meant, "Let kids get raped, enslaved, and beaten up because you're too busy being righteous (or safe?) to oppose evil force with justified force in response."
Indeed, that seems to have been part of Urban II's logic, when he unleashed the FIrst Crusade:
"They circumcise the Christians . . . When they wish to torture people by a base death, they perforate their navels . . . Others they bind to a post and pierce with arrows. Others they compel to extend their necks and then, attacking them with naked swords attempt to cut through the neck with a single blow. What shall I say of the abominable rape of women?. . . The kingdom of the Greeks is now dismembered . . . "
Nazreen is correct to trace this attitude to Mohammed, and to imply that the most radical and evil Islamic movements merely have to note the "holy prophet's" own actions, to fully justify the worst that they do, in most cases. This is why radical Islam and freedom-loving peoples will always be at war, and why we cannot expect final lvictory even when the Islamic State is defeated. We have no right to allow evil men (in this case we hardly need add "and women," since it is clear who is in the driver's seat) to conquer, hold, and exploit the populace, sexually and otherwise, of whole nations, preaching a radical ideology that espouses total war and world conquest, and not respond forcefully.
Of course, the fact that we must use force, does not mean we should lower ourselves to the level of our enemies, and engage in bloodbaths as the crusaders sometimes did. Of course we should minimize civilian casualties. Of course we should justify the battle, when necessary, in secular terms, that appeal to skeptics, as well as Hindus and Buddhists, and "moderate" Muslims.
And of course there will be times when individuals on our side violate our own standards, and will need themselves to be exposed, opposed, and punished, as some prison guards at Abu Ghraib were punished for abusing prisoners. Stuff happens in war, and should be minimized. But it is not a reason not to oppose great evils with force, when necessary.
So go kick their butts, US Marines. I'll even say a good word for Barack Obama, if he deals with these wretched human beings effectively. Jesus was on the side of the innocent, against their oppressors. And I think we should be, too.