Islam and the grooming gangs: A bullet point summary
INTRODUCTION
In the UK, there were widespread institutional practices of grooming, drugging and pimping of young white girls in at least 27 cities across the country.
The perpetrators of these incidents, other than their ethnicity have tended to have names that portray their religion of choice (Muhammad for example). In some cases, members of the same family were involved in these practices (brothers, brother-in-laws, father and sons). We have social media posts of some of the alleged perpetrators on Hajj in Mecca.
There have also been testimonies from victims emphasizing the Islamic motivations of the perpetrators (The Quran being read and recited, body parts branded “M” for Muhammad e.t.c.)
The case to be made in summary fashion here is that this is entirely consistent with Islam.
THE ISLAMIC CASE
- Unbelievers are the worst of creatures according to the Quran (Surah 98:6) while Muslims are the best of creatures according to the Quran (Surah 3:110).
- Islam permits taking women captives of war. They are referred to as “Those whom your right hand possess”
- Islam deems it permissible for men to have s*x with captives of war (Surah 4:24, 23:5–6, 70:30). The context of the revelation of Surah 4:24 is relayed in a Sahih Muslim hadith reproduced in the next bullet point
- Abu Sa’id al-Khudri (Allah her pleased with him) reported that at the Battle of Hanain Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ) sent an army to Autas and encountered the enemy and fought with them. Having overcome them and taken them captives, the Companions of Allah’s Messenger (may peace te upon him) seemed to refrain from having intercourse with captive women because of their husbands being polytheists. Then Allah, Most High, sent down regarding that: “ And women already married, except those whom your right hands possess (iv. 24)” (Sahih Muslim Book 17 Hadith 41)
- One might object that all of this is within the context of war but both the Quran and the hadith teach that those who follow Islam are at war with those who do not so perpetually (Surah 9:29–9:30 “Fight those who do not believe in Allah…”) and the hadith where Muhammad says he has been commanded to fight the people until they say there is no God but Allah and Muhammad is his messenger (Sahih Bukhari Book 2 Hadith 18. This is one of the most authentic hadiths of Mohammed and appears in many variations in multiple hadith collections). Point is Islam is at war with everybody who is not Muslim.
- If Islam is at war with everyone who is not Muslim then their women are eligible to be taken as captives and if this is the case, they are lawful for Muslims to have s*x with.
- Note that there is nothing in Islamic jurisprudence requiring the woman’s consent when it comes to “matters of the bedroom” in a marriage. If the woman’s consent is not a thing in marriage, what gives us the idea that it is a factor in a master-slave context?
- In Islam, it is also lawful to have s*x with children. This is supported by Surah 65:4 (if in doubt, look up all interpretations of it) and by the perfect moral example (Surah 33:21) of Muhammad in his marriage to Aisha when she was six and consummation of said marriage when she was nine.
APPLICATION OF THE ISLAMIC CASE TO THE GANGS
From the perspective of the perpetrators, the children who were abused were
- Non-Muslims so they are the worst of creatures
- Non-Muslim girls so they are eligible to be captives of the right hand
- Slaves so could be abused at their whims and caprices
- children so were eligible to be penetrated just like their prophet did with Aisha.
CONCLUSION
We have heard in the mainstream media that these acts have nothing to do with Islam. We have also heard the Muslim community condemn these acts (interestingly, one of the most vocal voices condemning the grooming gangs in Telford had multiple allegations of grooming against him) but the main person to condemn for these acts is Muhammad. Will they dare to condemn him as well?
