You believe Muhammad was the perfect moral example for humanity, correct? Sahih al-Bukhari 5134 and Sahih Muslim 1422 report that he married Aisha at six and consummated the marriage when she was nine. How can someone who engaged in sexual relations with a nine-year-old be considered a timeless, perfect moral example?"

You’re shifting the argument from whether Islam is morally correct to whether it has positive teachings and produces good followers. Those are two different questions. I don’t deny that Islam teaches charity, honesty, and justice, but the existence of good teachings doesn’t automatically make its entire moral framework sound. You also haven’t addressed the moral authority at the foundation of the religion. The Qur’an presents Muhammad as an excellent example to follow (33:21). That means his conduct is directly relevant to whether Islam provides a morally reliable framework. For example, Sahih al-Bukhari 5134 and Sahih Muslim 1422 report that Aisha was six at marriage and nine at consummation. If that conduct is morally unacceptable, how can Muhammad simultaneously be held up as the perfect example for humanity? And this isn’t simply cherry-picking. I’m examining what authoritative Islamic sources actually report and what the tradition historically permitted. The same issue arises with slavery and concubinage in classical Islamic jurisprudence. So I have two direct questions: Can a perfect moral example commit an act that would be morally wrong for anyone else? And if modern moral standards lead you to reject practices that authoritative Islamic sources historically permitted, what standard are you using to determine which teachings are morally correct?

You’re confusing the moral behaviour of Muslims with the moral standards authorised by their religion. I have no problem acknowledging that Muslim charities save lives and that millions of Muslims are generous people. But charity doesn’t answer whether a religious doctrine is morally justified. And you’re misrepresenting my argument as relying on one disputed narration. I’ve raised a separate issue: slavery and concubinage. Qur’an 4:24 and 23:5–6 refer to women whom men’s right hands possess. Classical Islamic jurisprudence permitted slave ownership and sexual relationships with female slaves. This isn’t an accusation about what every Muslim believes today; it’s a documented part of the legal tradition. You appeal to justice and accountability, so let’s apply those principles consistently: should a human being ever be owned by another person, and should an enslaved woman have the same right to refuse sexual access as a free woman? If your answer is yes, then explain why the historical religious legal framework permitted otherwise. And I never claimed that every Muslim is immoral or that Islam teaches nothing good. My argument is that positive teachings and generous followers don’t erase serious moral problems within authoritative sources and the historical legal tradition. So stop asking me to prove that every part of Islam is rotten. Address the actual moral contradictions I’ve raised.