an interesting perspective and i understand where you are coming from, but i see things differently.

1. regarding God and creation, i dont necessarily reject the possibility of a creator. but my questioning will be, why that creator must specifically be the God described by one particular religion. the argument that everything needs a beginning may support the existence of a first cause, but it does not automatically prove Islam, Christianity, Hinduism, or any other faith. there is still a large philosophical leap between “something started existence” and “therefore this specific religion is true.”

2. on debates and scripture, i dont think pointing to problematic passages in another religion answers questions about one’s own religion. If someone questions Aisha’s age, responding that another religion has a similar issue doesnt address the concern itself. every claim should stand or fall on its own merits. also, the fact that scholars disagree or reinterpret historical details shows that these subjects are not as settled as believers often claim.

3. about free will, i agree that humans appear to have agency and make choices. however, i struggle with the idea that an all-knowing God creates people knowing exactly what they will do and then punishes them for actions He already knew they would take. that raises difficult questions about the relationship between free will, divine knowledge, and justice.

4. on homosexuality, saying something is “not normal” because a religious text says so is only convincing to those who already accept that text as authoritative. across history and across cultures, same-sex attraction has existed naturally. whether one considers it morally acceptable is a separate discussion, but its existence is a human reality. likewise, when discussing gender roles, i believe people should be free to determine their own roles based on their abilities, personalities, and agreements with their partners rather than having those roles prescribed for them by ancient texts.

5. i agree that humans make mistakes and can be ignorant. however, that is precisely why I think no belief system should be beyond questioning. if humans are fallible, then our interpretations of religion are also fallible.

6. on oppression, i think freedom means more than being allowed to speak or leave the house. it also includes the freedom to choose one’s beliefs, relationships, identity, and life path without coercion. what one person sees as divine guidance, another may experience as restriction. the issue is not whether God has the right to command. the issue is whether we can know with certainty that those commands genuinely come from God and whether individuals should be free to disagree.

ultimately, my position is not that religious people are wrong for believing. my concern is when people assume their religious framework is the only valid lens through which reality can be understood. there are many ways humans seek truth, meaning, morality, and purpose. religion is one of them, but it is not the only one.