Aksel Ankersen wrote:Debunker seems to have lost interest, his position (like that of AB, I presume) is that al-laa-ee Lam Yahdina in 65:4 covers cases of secondary amenorrhea.
I did not lose interest, I never do with my passionate work, however it seems that FFI cannot come with anything new, just the repetitive crap by some ignorant parrots who were formatted and programmed beyond repairs
Did not you notice that from all the refutations posted by me, which were very coherent and logical and well supported by the Quran, NONE HERE CONCEDED FOR EVEN ONE REFUTATION, this must say it all regarding how manipulated the goons in here are. That does not upset me the slightest, as for them are their deeds, and for me are mine, and quite the contrary their stubbornace confirms so many verses in the Quran.
Now you goons as expected opened this subject again which I slam dunked before so many times with so many goons, that was even before you have been a member in here, which is really sickening and retarded, but let me see what you have to add or parrot again:
Aksel Ankersen wrote:
Well, how about this article from Reuter's Health? Compare the English
versions of it.
Tough luck pal, I have no time to read external links, what you need to do is simply extract from that article what is useful to your argument then we discuss it in here, so I hope what I am about to read below is your extract from that article.
Aksel Ankersen wrote:As one can clearly see, in referring to female athletes who were past the age of menarche but suffered from amenorrhea they wrote Laa Yahidna (لا يحضن) i.e. not menstruating, which is the obvious choice if an adult female stops menstruating for any physiological reason.
denies past, present and possible future, so your argument must be dismissed in the ignorance bin, don't you know those who reached the menapose (i think that is what is called) are mentioned explicitly in the Quran and what we should do to them regading Idda?
See, if the Quran does not mention the women who are divorced between their periods, then we will never know what Idah should be for them
LAM denies the present or the NEAR past, FUKIN PERIOD
Why don't you concede and be a man?
Just for your knowledge too, pal, THERE IS NO OTHER DENIAL DEVICE IN ARABIC TO DENY THE PRESENT AND THE NEAR PAST EXCEPT LAM
So your crap must be bloody dismissed
Aksel Ankersen wrote: Menstruation is of course a cyclic process and as for the women whose menstrual cycle is suspended (due to stress, disease or malnutrition) it is logical to refer to them as al-laa-ee Laa Yahidna (اللائي لا يحضن), rather than al-laa-ee Lam Yahdina (اللائي لم يحضن), the latter being prepubescent girls who have never menstruated.[/color]
What a stupid argument
(اللائي لا يحضن
) means those who NEVER HAD THE PERIOD IN THE PAST AND IN THE PRESENT AND POSSIBLE FUTURE, this is because the device LA
Here a simple example for a child who knows Arabic to comprehend:
If Person A asked Person B @ 10:00 AM
Did you eat breakfast?
Person B has no other fukin denial device BUT LAM to deny that he had his breakfast, so person B must reply as follow:
LAM AKUL AL-FITAR?
i fukin e
I did not eat my breakfast
Had person B answered as follow:
LA AKUL AL-FITAR?
It fukin means that Person B never had any breakfast in his life
that should bring us to anoth mother of all slams: