If anyone who claimed to be a Prophet had sex with a 9-year old, would you accept that he is a Prophet?
Yes, if I lived in the year 600 AD, and grew up in what is today known as Saudi Arabia, in a culture where a girl who hits puberty is known as a woman and ready for marriage and sex, then yes, I would accept him as a Prophet. Even less than 100 years ago in Iran, 14-year old girls were getting married to men 3 times their age. In the past, not just in Muslim cultures but in older cultures, a girl who hit puberty was a woman, whether at 8 or 18. Now today, in this day and age, it's disgusting. Maybe in 1000 years time, they'll look back at us and see promiscuous sex and having 3-somes and porn as being really degrading and disgusting, but today it's not seen as such but even seen as natural and modern. Yet in the future views could change, just like they have over the last 1,300 years.
The mistake a lot of Iranians outside Iran make, and I include a large number of LA satellite channels in this, is that they assume that most people in Iran hold a similar anti-Islam view as they do. They don't understand that these views cause many who might otherwise be against the IRI to now think that being against the IRI means holding views of Islam as an evil religion or Muhammad as a child rapist or so on. And so indirectly they're actually playing into the hands of the mullahs who say "See, we told you so! The Green Movement is against Islam and they even boast it."
The reality is that the anti-Islam group, even among Iranians outside Iran, is a minority. Inside Iran it's a smaller minority, and many people equate the braveness of Karroubi to stand against injustice as being in line with what the Prophet Muhammad and Ali did in their days.
Now obviously in a free Iran and a free vote, everyone can express their ideas and the people choose. My estimate is that the anti-Islam people might get 1 member in a democratic Majlis, out of perhaps 300 or more. The Shahis who simply identify with the Pahlavi regime would probably get about 10. Leftists and socialists would probably get around 50-60. Hizbollahis would maybe get around 10-20. And the rest would be split between religious nationalists like Bazargan and Ibrahim Yazdi, and secular nationalists like Mossadegh and the Foruhars. The extremes of Iranian society, whether Shahi, Hizbollahi, anti-Islam nationalists, etc.. would be on the fringes of society and not the general tendency of the population. And even now during the protests and struggle for change, instead of unifying, these extremes are causing fights at rallies outside of Iran and trying to extend their personal agendas rather than seeing the bigger issue. Obviously people will disagree, and I accept that. I love and respect all the Prophets, including outside of Islam like Buddha and Confucius. And some only are somewhat orthodox in their views and only believe in Islam. Others don't have a belief and don't care. And still others are anti-religion or anti-Islam and feel that no matter what the mores or standards of belief of thousands of years ago, what's wrong today is what's wrong 1 million years ago is what's wrong 1 million years from now. And so people believe what they want, and I don't think we're gonna change anyone's views here unless there was maybe some American dude who visits ISP for fun and wanted to convert to a religion and now won't convert to Islam. Otherwise, I think it's better to focus on the bigger issues rather than obsess about what people thousands of years ago did, the future flag, whether Iran should have 1 or 2 Majlis's, or whether Iran should build a space station on Mars or the Moon first. Now is not the time to create division over issues from the far past or future but to see the bigger picture and have unity on issues like freedom, democracy, and human rights.
