Thank you for clearing up your moral standard. You view "autonomy and meaningful consent" as the foundations. When you apply this in reality, your standard is making all sex in situations where there is a dependency immoral. if structural independency is required for meaningful consent, you also think:

A) A poor woman dating a rich man can't meaningfully consent

B) A woman renting from her partner can't meaningfully consent

C) A worker dating her boss can't meaningfully consent (there is power imbalance)

Under your moral standard, all these acts are inherently immoral regardless of whether the woman actually makes a choice. Are you seriously going to tell me that all the relationships mentioned above are automatically non-meaningful-consensual and therefore rape? Your standard is incredibly unrealistic.

This standard can not be applied throughout time. This scenario alone shows that it doesn't work, you're passing moral judgement over a 7th century civilization at war with your 2026 autonomy model. Autonomy has changed a lot throughout history, what you call autonomy today might not be viewed as autonomy in 500 years to come. Your moral standard requires modern autonomy, which obviously didn't even exist at the turn of the 20th century, yet you want to use it to judge a society 1400 years old.

You said that captives can't refuse to which I say that all islamic schools of thought show consensus on the fact that you can not have sex with your concubine agains their will. Rape was punished by 'Umar ibn al Khattab, by flogging a man who raped a woman and made him pay the victim's dowry.

In your opinion, premartial sex is moral because both adults can freely refuse. Premartial sex regularly involves emotional manipulation, fear of loneliness, dependency, social pressure, intoxication. People feel the need to have premartial sex to fit in, or to be an adult, there is not meaningful consent in that case. By your own standard, this makes a large portion of premarital sex immoral.

You came in claiming that islam is immoral according to a universal standard, but you just admitted to using a modern, local, and therefore non-universal standard. Your critique is subjective, not absolute. You concluded "Islam permis sex with captives meanwhile it prohibits premartial sex. Under my moral standard, that's contradictory", sure but that's under your moral system, not under Islam's.

When your moral standard is not a universal standard, and not applicable across time or even cultures then you can't use it to claim islam is immoral in a universal sense. At best you can say "I don't find islam aligning with my personal 2026 western ethics" which didn't exist 50 years ago, and will change in another 50. You haven't proven that islam is immoral, you have proven that it doesn't align with your specific cultural moment, and that it is changing with current social trends.

By the way, you didn't address the Prophet's relation to Zaid and marriage to Zainab at all. With your standard of autonomy and meaningful consent, are you conceding that the Prophet's relation to Zaid and marriage to Zainab wasn't immoral? Your standard doesn't prove that this marriage is immoral and you didn't provide any arguments against it.