₦airaland Forum

SkengRay:
That Lad is Just an Ignoramus . Hes always bragging about being a Scandinavian, Viking bla bla bla but against other cultures How dense can he really get. The obsession is just wild

😘 you're obsessed with me

SkengRay:
That Lad is Just an Ignoramus . Hes always bragging about being a Scandinavian, Viking bla bla bla but against other cultures How dense can he really get. The obsession is just wild

Funny.
And you're mr brainiac? Thats stuck in this country posted a catalogue of women he wants but can't have? You utter giraffe.

DeepSight:
+
Its a culture and it has deeper significance than what you have attributed to it in terms of humiliation. In fact it has nothing to do with humiliation.

Is that what you went through and is that your annoyance?

Look, you need to understand cultures before you deride them.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KXkGU3j4KpI?si=bg7Uf6KPhBRh1IDG

I live here, i know this is not 100% true but it is highly accurate. Its what the world thinks. Its what Africa thinks and its a Nigerian man in the video saying it.

DeepSight:
+
Its a culture and it has deeper significance than what you have attributed to it in terms of humiliation. In fact it has nothing to do with humiliation.

Is that what you went through and is that your annoyance?

Look, you need to understand cultures before you deride them.

Now jester, the legal reality.....

LEGAL REALITY OF MARRIAGE, BRIDE PRICE, FAMILY AUTHORITY, AND ADULT AUTONOMY IN NIGERIA
This is a statement of law, not culture, not religion, and not opinion.
This post addresses the recurring false claims that:
Families have legal authority over adult marriages
Bride price creates or validates marriage
Cultural rites such as introduction are compulsory
Adults must plead or negotiate for family approval
All four claims are legally false in Nigeria.
This applies equally to Nigerians and foreigners.
PART 1
SUPREMACY OF THE CONSTITUTION
The Constitution of the Federal Republic of Nigeria 1999 as amended is the supreme law.
Section 1(3)
Any law, custom, or practice inconsistent with the Constitution is void.
No tradition, family rule, or cultural expectation has legal force where it conflicts with constitutional rights.
PART 2
MARRIAGE IS A FUNDAMENTAL PERSONAL RIGHT
Section 34(1)
Right to dignity of the human person.
Every adult has the right to bodily autonomy, personal choice, and freedom from humiliation or coercion.
This includes the right to reject any marriage condition, ritual, or demand imposed by family or community.
Section 35(1)
Right to personal liberty.
Liberty includes freedom of movement and freedom to choose personal relationships.
No family, elder, or husband has lawful authority to decide whether an adult may marry, stay married, or leave a home.
Language such as “allow her to leave” has no legal meaning.
Section 37
Right to private and family life.
Marriage decisions are private matters between consenting adults.
Family intrusion, cultural enforcement, or community pressure has no constitutional basis.
Section 38(1)
Freedom of thought, conscience, and religion.
Adults may freely choose to marry under statutory law, customary law, religious law, a combination, or none.
They may also freely reject any rite, belief, or cultural process including bride price, introduction, or family approval.
Section 42(1)
Freedom from discrimination.
No adult may be subjected to additional marriage conditions based on gender, tribe, culture, religion, or nationality.
PART 3
THE COUPLE MAY REJECT FAMILY CONSENT, BRIDE PRICE, AND INTRODUCTION
This point is absolute under Nigerian law.
A couple may lawfully reject:
• family consent
• family approval
• bride price
• family introduction
• traditional rites
• elder negotiations
None of these are legal requirements for marriage.
Families have no legal veto power.
Courtesy is optional. Consent is not transferable.
PART 4
THE MARRIAGE ACT IS CLEAR AND EXHAUSTIVE
Marriage Act Cap M6 LFN 2004 governs statutory marriages.
Section 7
Marriage begins when the couple gives notice to the registrar.
No family involvement is required.
Section 11
The registrar issues a certificate once satisfied that both parties are of full age and have freely consented.
Free consent of the couple is the only legal requirement.
Section 34
A marriage celebrated under the Act is valid for all purposes throughout Nigeria.
Section 41
Any person who attempts to prevent a marriage by pretending that their consent is required by law commits an offence.
This includes families, elders, or community members who claim that: • bride price is mandatory
• introduction is compulsory
• family approval is required
• permission must be granted
Such conduct is criminal under Nigerian law.
PART 5
CUSTOMARY LAW IS OPTIONAL AND LIMITED
Customary marriage exists only when voluntarily chosen.
Evidence Act 2011 Section 18(3)
Any custom that is repugnant to natural justice, equity, and good conscience is unenforceable.
Customs that: • force compliance
• restrict exit
• degrade dignity
• treat adults as property
are void.
Case law confirms this:
Osamwonyi v Osamwonyi 1972
Consent is fundamental to all marriages.
Agbeja v Agbeja 1985
Customary marriage must be voluntary.
Meribe v Egwu 1976
Ritual form does not override consent.
Mojekwu v Mojekwu 1997
Oppressive or discriminatory customs are unconstitutional.
Obi v Bosah 2019
Bride price and handing over define customary marriage only when the couple chooses that system.
PART 6
BRIDE PRICE HAS NO LEGAL FORCE
Bride price is cultural only.
It does not: • create marriage
• validate marriage
• transfer authority
• remove autonomy
• restrict exit
Failure to pay bride price does not invalidate a statutory marriage.
Refund of bride price has no effect on statutory marriage.
PART 7
RITUALS AND INTRODUCTIONS ARE NEVER COMPULSORY
Even where a couple voluntarily chooses a traditional marriage:
• no introduction is compulsory
• no ritual is mandatory
• no prostration is enforceable
• no kneeling is compulsory
• no symbolic submission can be imposed
Refusal of any ritual does not invalidate a marriage.
PART 8
INTERNATIONAL LAW BINDS NIGERIA
African Charter on Human and Peoples’ Rights Cap A9 LFN 2004
Article 2
Equality without discrimination.
Article 6
Right to liberty and security.
Article 18(3)
Protection of family rights without discrimination.
These protections apply to all persons in Nigeria.
PART 9
LEGAL CONSEQUENCES FOR FAMILY INTERFERENCE
Families or community members who:
• attempt to stop a lawful marriage
• demand bride price as a condition
• insist on introductions or rites
• claim authority over adult consent
• restrict movement or exit
are violating the Constitution and the Marriage Act.
Such actions expose them to: • criminal liability under Section 41 of the Marriage Act
• civil liability for rights violations
• court injunctions restraining interference
Culture is not a defence.
PART 10
LANGUAGE THAT EXPOSES ILLEGAL THINKING
Statements such as:
“He should allow her to leave”
“Without us there is no marriage”
“You must beg us”
“You should be grateful we reduced demands”
have no basis in law.
They reflect control logic, not legal authority.
PART 11
FINAL LEGAL POSITION
Under Nigerian law:
Marriage is voluntary.
Consent is personal.
Family consent is optional.
Bride price is optional.
Introduction is optional.
Culture is optional.
Exit cannot be blocked.
Autonomy cannot be transferred.
Any claim to the contrary is legally false.
This is not disrespect to tradition.
It is obedience to the Constitution.

DeepSight:
+
Its a culture and it has deeper significance than what you have attributed to it in terms of humiliation. In fact it has nothing to do with humiliation.

Is that what you went through and is that your annoyance?

Look, you need to understand cultures before you deride them.

The simple version since you are illiterate, jester....

Let’s stop pretending.

When people shout “Our tradition! Prostrate! Do full Yoruba wedding! Respect our culture!”
they always list what the groom must do.

They almost never mention what the bride’s family was originally supposed to do to deserve all that respect, bride price, and full prostration package.

If we are talking real old school Yoruba custom (not 2026 selective memory), then “tradition” was a bundle:

If the groom’s side does X, Y, Z…
the bride’s family must also have done A, B, C.

You can’t demand one half and quietly delete the other.

Virginity = “lineage guarantee” (and the parents had duties here)

In old Yoruba custom, virginity wasn’t just a cute idea, it was family honour + lineage certainty.

There was asa ibile, the white cloth on the wedding night to prove virginity.
If she was a virgin, gifts and money went back to her parents in pride.
If not, symbolic shame (half-boiled yam, etc.) was sent instead.

Virginity was tied to good upbringing, proper monitoring, protection, and no secret boyfriends and baby daddies.

Meaning,
if you want to shout “our tradition!” about prostration & bride price, then the girl’s family were also obligated to.....

protect her from sexual abuse and exploitation
actually supervise her movements and relationships

insist on no sex before marriage if they want to use virginity as their cultural bragging right.

You cannot abandon all those parental duties, turn blind eye to “coded runs”, then still stand up on wedding day forming “we are traditional, prostrate for us.”

That’s not culture. That’s selective memory.

Proper upbringing & character, Ìwà, not just makeup.......

Traditional Yoruba marriage respected families that raised Omoluabi, good character.

The bride’s family was expected to,

raise her with discipline, honesty, respect, and home training

teach her how to live peacefully in another house, not how to weaponise drama
show that she is entering the man’s home as asset, not destabiliser

Old texts and studies emphasise that part of what groom’s family is “thanking” the bride’s family for (with owo orí, gifts, prostration) is the years of proper upbringing & moral training.

If you’ve never really raised the girl, grandparents did everything, or she basically raised herself on TikTok and church performances, then what exactly are we prostrating for?

Protection & supervision not throwing girls to wolves.....

Traditionally, there were clear systems......

alarina, go between and chaperones in courtship

structured visits
serious monitoring of who is courting the daughter and with what intention

If a grown man slept with an unbetrothed virgin, he was expected to pay and/or marry her there was some accountability......

Today?

many families don’t protect their daughters
don’t believe them when something happens

push them out early to “hustle”

then suddenly remember “tradition” when it’s time to collect list and bride price.

Again, you can’t throw away your side of the cultural duty, then resurrect it only when money and prostration enter the chat.

The bride’s “equipment” used to be their job, not the groom’s

Historically, the bride’s family were supposed to send her off properly equipped,

clothing
cooking tools
home essentials

things that show she’s ready to manage a home and contribute.

Now look at most modern lists:

“gas cooker, fridge, blender, full kitchen, generator, furniture…”

all dumped on the groom, while the bride’s family basically arrive with vibes, matching aso ebi and billing.

If we’re being honest,

Tradition = the bride’s family equip her to be an asset in that home.
Extortion = the groom fully equips their daughter and their own kitchen back home.

Pick one. Don’t call extortion “culture.”

Dowry (owo orí) was symbolic, not ransom.......

Old Yoruba custom:
dowry was often small and symbolic, and in many cases returned, to emphasise “we are not selling our daughter, this is just culture.”

Even where it wasn’t returned, it was still token-level, not “buy a mini-supermarket or no wife.”
Modern practice in many families?
Endless lists, extra bills on the day, “add something”, “Ibòmbo – we trained your daughter”, multiple unplanned levies.

Question,
If you truly trained her and truly spent on her, it will show in her character, skills, education, stability.
You won’t need to “over-compensate” on the list to prove it.

Ongoing support, not “collect and disappear”........

Traditionally, bride’s family didn’t just cash out and disappear,

they continued to support, advise, mediate, and guide the new couple

elders prayed, blessed, and sometimes corrected their own daughter when she was the problem,

Now?

Most families,

interfere when it benefits them
vanish when there is real problem
side their daughter blindly even when she’s wrong
still expect maximum respect + money flow + “in-law of the year” treatment.

Again, if we are using real tradition,
your role as bride’s family continues after the marriage. It’s not just “collect list & spray money.”

So what’s the actual point here?......

Not to insult Yoruba culture.
Not to say “women are bad” or “families are evil.”

The point is simple.....

You cannot demand full traditional obedience from a groom
when you did not fulfil your own traditional duties as the bride’s family.

If your daughter......

was not protected from abuse
was not supervised in courtship
was not raised with real Omoluabi character
was not properly equipped from your side

did not keep the “purity” you now weaponise
did not benefit from your ongoing moral support

…then be honest:

You are no longer operating full Yoruba tradition.
You are operating modern life + selective “tradition” for money and ego.
Fine. Life has changed. Nobody is perfect.
But then stop shouting:

“He must prostrate!”
“He must give us X, Y, Z because culture!”
“Registry alone is not marriage!”

If you want modern, do modern: registry + simple intro + mutual respect.
If you want tradition, then accept that tradition binds both families, not just the man.

Final questions for you.....

Can a family that didn’t uphold the traditional duties listed above still demand full prostration and heavy “list” with a straight face?

Shouldn’t we be honest that what many people call “tradition” today is edited tradition, mostly focused on what the man must pay and perform?
If submission is demanded from the woman, and prostration from the man, then where is the matching accountability from both families?

No insults, No tribal bashing
Just simple logic

This is a logical trap......

1) if you defend the current practice then you are admitting its not tradition

2) if you admit it is tradition then you accept the obligations of the bride's family

3) if you say "times have changed" then you have to stop demaning/expecting prostration/bride price

4) if you attack then you cant defend your own logic

5) if you ignore it you prove hypocrisy and fraud

DeepSight:
+
Its a culture and it has deeper significance than what you have attributed to it in terms of humiliation. In fact it has nothing to do with humiliation.

Is that what you went through and is that your annoyance?

Look, you need to understand cultures before you deride them.

Read this carefully jester....

Let’s say it plainly, without romance or anger.
Prostration is not greeting.
It is not politeness.
It is not “respect”.
In Yoruba logic, prostration is a ritualised acknowledgement of moral and social authority.
When a groom prostrates, he is publicly declaring:
“You stand above me in this context because you have fulfilled your duty to a level that justifies my submission.”
That is why elders prostrate to older elders.
That is why kings receive prostration.
That is why it is not casual.
So the moment a family demands prostration, they are making a claim.
Not about culture.
About their own conduct.
They are saying:
“We did our part so thoroughly that you must lower your entire body in recognition.”
That claim has consequences.
Let’s re-walk the full traditional package, slowly, without nostalgia edits.
Lineage certainty was the foundation
Virginity was not about shaming women.
It was about certainty in a patrilineal society.
Because of that, the burden was shared.
The girl was expected to abstain.
The family was expected to enforce, supervise, and protect.
This included:
controlling access
monitoring movements
restricting unsupervised courtship
preventing exploitation
intervening early when something looked wrong
Failure here was not “modern life”.
It was parental failure in traditional terms.
So if a family did not do this, they have already broken the traditional chain.
You cannot skip the foundation and still demand the roof.
Prostration was tied to proven upbringing, not biology
A man did not prostrate simply because “you gave birth to a girl”.
He prostrated because that girl arrived with:
discipline
emotional regulation
respect
conflict management
domestic competence
social awareness
That was the evidence of years of labour.
If she arrived:
entitled
unmanaged
hostile
unstable
trained to escalate instead of resolve
Then the traditional logic flips.
The groom is no longer receiving an “asset”.
He is assuming risk.
And risk does not demand prostration.
Courtship supervision was non-negotiable
Old Yoruba systems assumed active parental involvement.
Not vibes.
Not prayers.
Not “she’s grown”.
There were:
go-betweens
chaperoned visits
intentional scrutiny
early boundary enforcement
If a man crossed a line, accountability followed.
Today, many families:
disengage completely
ignore red flags
allow secret relationships
dismiss abuse reports
outsource responsibility to fate
Then suddenly, on wedding day, rediscover authority.
That is not tradition.
That is retroactive control.
Equipment was evidence of readiness
Traditionally, the bride did not arrive empty.
Her family sent her equipped, materially and symbolically.
It said:
“We prepared her to manage a home.”
Modern lists invert this completely.
Now the groom:
equips the bride
equips the marital home
equips the in-laws’ expectations
While the bride’s family provides ceremony aesthetics and billing.
That inversion alone is proof that this is no longer traditional logic.
And once logic flips, ritual weight must reduce.
You cannot intensify prostration while hollowing out responsibility.
Dowry inflation exposes insecurity
In traditional systems, value was visible.
Character spoke.
Skills spoke.
Stability spoke.
That’s why dowry stayed symbolic.
When lists become excessive, it signals something uncomfortable:
The family is trying to monetise what they cannot demonstrate.
If your daughter is truly well-raised, you don’t need to shout it with invoices.
You let her presence do the talking.
Post-marriage accountability was mandatory
Traditionally, elders did not disappear.
They:
mediated disputes
corrected their daughter when necessary
restrained excesses
discouraged escalation
Today, many families:
intervene selectively
weaponise family pressure
excuse bad behaviour
still expect financial flow and ritual respect
That breaks the moral loop.
You cannot abandon accountability and still demand submission.
Now the unavoidable conclusion
Once even one of these obligations is abandoned, the moral basis for demanding full prostration collapses.
Not partially.
Completely.
Because prostration is total submission, not symbolic courtesy.
So here is the clean logic, no emotion:
If you want full prostration, you must show full traditional compliance
If you want modern life, you must accept modern equality and mutual respect
You cannot mix modern freedom with ancient submission and call it culture
That mix is not tradition.
It is extraction.
Final trap, fully sealed
There is no safe answer to this if one is honest.
Defend current practice → you admit it is edited tradition
Insist it is tradition → you accept bride’s family obligations
Say times have changed → prostration must change or go
Attack the argument → you reveal insecurity
Ignore it → you confirm bad faith
That’s why people dodge.
That’s why they shout.
That’s why they insult.
Because logic has cornered them.
No insults.
No tribal bashing.
Just structure.
Prostration is too heavy a ritual to survive selective memory.

DeepSight:
+
So according to you, your issue is Nigerian men lying about wedding culture?

Is that it?

But my real problem is Yoruba. Prostration was never mandatory and never "begging for a bride"
Yoruba ancestors cared more about a man that will stand up straight AND treat the woman right over getting on his stomach AND abusing her later.
Look at Yoruba weddings today, pushing men to the ground and saying "beg harder" laughing and pointing. Thats not humility or respect. Thats public and ritual humiliation.

DeepSight:
+
So according to you, your issue is Nigerian men lying about wedding culture?

Is that it?

Your wedding traditions for all tribes were for lineage guarantee "virginity" if the woman is a virgin at marriage. Then all men should absolutely do the traditions BUT if that woman lives a modern life with 100% sexual freedom, hook up culture and coded runs then the family have no right to scream traditions later and its always the fathers and uncles that pressure the couple by screaming "mandatory" when its no such thing. And federal law is very clear on it. The family have no say.
A couple can freely reject everything or some parts and the law will always side with the couple not the family.

TenQ:
In have spoken!
Have a nice day!

You’ve spoken, yes.
You just haven’t addressed the objection.
That distinction matters.
Take care.

DeepSight:
+
Leave Nigerian Men alone. Thaz all. Other than that, enjoy your life.

You begged 😂😂

You want me to leave Nigerian men alone? Stop lying about something as petty as culture. No other country does it.

All countries have hypocrisy but no other countries outright lie about wedding culture. its not the women that lie about it. Its the fathers and uncles.

TenQ:
It is on record that you refused to answer simple questions because you realise how hastily you have jumped to your conclusions.

Fear of picking issues one at a time had also affected you and muddling up discussion is your escape mechanism.

You gave a challenge
Your challenge was answered
You avoid scrutiny!

You cannot be helped with this stance!

Again,
Have a nice day!

For clarity: declining to answer questions that assume their own conclusion is not “avoidance”. It is the objection.
I repeatedly asked you to justify the inference your questions rely on. That request was never addressed.
Anyone reading can judge that for themselves.
Have a good day.

DeepSight:
+
Worever.
I guess you also forgot you claimed to be Nigerian as well.

And British as well. Taught English by an Australian.

At some point you even added American.

Look it's not my business, I don't know you, you jolly well could be all countries, sha leave Naija men alone since we are the worst creatures in the world.

You actually begged another member to come rescue you.

DeepSight:
+
Worever.
I guess you also forgot you claimed to be Nigerian as well.

And British as well. Taught English by an Australian.

At some point you even added American.

Look it's not my business, I don't know you, you jolly well could be all countries, sha leave Naija men alone since we are the worst creatures in the world.

Like you begging for rescue to another member is posted, and screenshot then reposted 😂

DeepSight:
+
Worever.
I guess you also forgot you claimed to be Nigerian as well.

And British as well. Taught English by an Australian.

At some point you even added American.

Look it's not my business, I don't know you, you jolly well could be all countries, sha leave Naija men alone since we are the worst creatures in the world.

I didn't add anything, if you learn to read, you can go back and read it again because what I actually said is posted in multiple topics AND this one.

DeepSight:
+
Worever.
I guess you also forgot you claimed to be Nigerian as well.

I said Nigerian citizenship, you illiterate child.
My profile also "I am not Nigerian"

My daughter is half yoruba like ive repeatedly said since day 1. No wonder this country is in the state it is when you do not understand the most basic distinctions.
Again you fail to understand the difference between nationality and citizenship.

TenQ:
Have a nice day then.

I don't have time for one who cannot objectively face the TRUTH even when it doesn't go their way.

Four simple questions and all you get is ramblings!?
SMH!

That’s fine. Have a good day.
For the record, refusing to answer loaded questions that presuppose a conclusion is not “rambling”. It’s basic critical reasoning.
I repeatedly asked you to JUSTIFY the inference your questions rely on. You chose repetition and pressure instead. That’s your choice.
Anyone reading can see the difference between refusing to comply and being unable to respond.
All the best.

DeepSight:
+
That one person has claimed to be Norwegian, Swedish, Danish, British and Nigerian and taught English by an Australian.
And yet, obsessed with Nigerian men only, who according to the creature, are the worst things on Earth.

Oya leave us na, e no gree.

And you obviously cannot read..
Father = Swedish/Norwegian
Mother = Danish/Norwegian

Me = Norwegian/Swedish/Danish

Nationality and citizenship are completely different and its ridiculously idiotic that you confuse them.
Nationality is where you are born but citizenship is where you earn living or grow up.
You are lazy with logic and have clearly never left Nigeria.

DeepSight:
+
That one person has claimed to be Norwegian, Swedish, Danish, British and Nigerian and taught English by an Australian.
And yet, obsessed with Nigerian men only, who according to the creature, are the worst things on Earth.

Oya leave us na, e no gree.

I’m not playing your game, and if you slow down for a moment, you’ll see why.
I’m not here arguing opinions. I’m posting federal law, constitutional rights, and documented legal history. I’m also laying out how customary practices actually interact with statutory law in this country.
Every non-Nigerian who reads this and understands their legal position is one less person who can be misled about their rights. Since these discussions started, more people have begun involving lawyers early when families are introduced. That changes outcomes.
Here’s the legal reality, whether people like it or not:
Cultural demands do not override federal law.
Interference in an adult relationship has legal consequences.
False claims about “disrespect” can cross into defamation.
These are not threats. They are established legal facts.
The difference between us is not emotion or culture. It’s scope of knowledge. I’m working from federal statutes, constitutional protections, and enforcement mechanisms. You’re repeating what you were told at family or village level.
That gap matters, because law is what ultimately governs outcomes, not custom.
If you want to argue, argue the law.
If you want to argue culture, accept its limits.
Those aren’t opinions. That’s how the system actually works.

TenQ:
Sorry!
Either you engage or shut up.

Four questions and you can even answer one!

The highlight show that you are not reading for comprehension because I already told you that




But because you don't read for comprehension, that's exactly what you read.

Answer the FOUR short Questions if truely you want to engage

Hush...be quiet...

Your tactics won’t work on me.
I don’t respond to demands for obedience without justification. “Answer because I said so” is not how I was raised. I was taught to challenge claims, to ask why, and to reject authority that cannot explain itself.
What you’re asking for is compliance. What I’m offering is engagement. Those are not the same thing.
You’ve had multiple opportunities to justify your foundation. Instead of doing that, you’ve repeated the same questions and escalated the tone, hoping insistence will substitute for reasoning.
It won’t.
If your argument were sound, it wouldn’t require intimidation, forced formats, or yes/no traps to function. The fact that it does tells me everything I need to know about the strength of the foundation you’re defending

TenQ:
Sorry!
Either you engage or shut up.

Four questions and you can even answer one!

The highlight show that you are not reading for comprehension because I already told you that




But because you don't read for comprehension, that's exactly what you read.

Answer the FOUR short Questions if truely you want to engage

Be quiet.....hush.....

I have engaged. You are refusing to.
Telling someone to “answer or shut up” is not debate. It’s an attempt to bully compliance after your framing has been challenged.
I have explained, multiple times, why your four questions are invalid as posed: they presuppose the very conclusion you claim to be testing. Repeating them and demanding yes/no answers does not address that objection.
This is the point you keep avoiding.
I am not required to answer questions that embed the conclusion in their setup. In any serious academic context, that would be stopped immediately.
If you want engagement, justify the inference you are trying to force.
Explain how you move from
“we do not currently have evidence for X”
to
“therefore an intelligent uncaused first cause exists”
without an argument from ignorance or a category error.
If you cannot do that, then shouting “four questions” is not comprehension on your part. It is evasion.
This is my last attempt to engage on substance.
If the next response is more demands, insults, or repetition, that will speak for itself.

TenQ:
Sorry! I did no reframe ANYTHING.
1. I took you back to your original challenge
Then.
2. I presented the first point in my original challenge
Then,
3. I gave you 4 questions by which you can either agree with my point 1 OR state why it is wrong.



We will go through each point until it is exhausted.

This is how to raise objections not the haphazard splashing about with no directions



AGAIN


Debate is not lumping up unorganized thoughts and expecting a coherent response.

Again:
Your question was


I gave you a list of ten points that will lead you to the logical and scientific conclusion that an Intelligent Uncaused-First-Cause of Everything must exist.

My first point was:

1. Do you by any chance have any evidence of non-life bringing forth life or offspring?
2. Do you have any evidence of DNA being synthesised from non-life in the laboratory?
3. Do you think a non-biological intelligent system like an AI program can exist without an external intelligent organiser?


Before you go at tangent : I am not asking about synthesis of amino acids or inorganic compounds!


These are Yes or No questions and please back it up with relevant evidence if your answer is a YES!

4. Finally, if you go to Mars and find a building with Doors, Windows and functional compartments like living room, kitchen, store and bedroom that had been standing for more than a million years with no-one in sight, will you conclude that an Intelligent Builder must have built it or the earthquakes and Martian dust built it? Or on Mars, you find the picture of a horselike animal, with canvas, frame, nails, glue, shapes and colours will you conclude that the painting made itself?

Note: I never said:
You exist and you are an intelligent and rational creature.... therefore God!
A Building is the evidence of a Builder... therefore God.
A painting is the evidence of a Painter... therefore God!


I hope you can be rational, truthful, logical and scientific in your response. Please make your answers SHORT so that I can layout my second point

You are still not engaging with the core objection.
Restating your process, repeating the questions, or insisting on short yes/no answers does not address the problem I have already raised.
Your questions are not independent tests of a premise. They are structured to force agreement by narrowing the response space until only one conclusion appears available. That is why I am refusing the frame.
To be explicit:
Questions 1–3 hinge on current limits of experimental knowledge. A lack of present evidence for abiogenesis or laboratory synthesis does not logically imply intelligence, design, or an “uncaused first cause”. “We do not yet know” is not a scientific bridge to metaphysical conclusions.
Question 4 relies on analogy. That analogy only works because we already possess independent empirical knowledge of builders, painters, and designers. You do not have equivalent prior observation of universes being designed. Without that, the analogy cannot be generalised. I have already stated this, and repeating the analogy does not repair it.
You also do not get to restrict answers to “yes or no” when the validity of the inference itself is what is being challenged. Reducing complex epistemological issues to forced binaries is not scientific rigor, it is rhetorical pressure.
This is not “haphazard splashing”. It is a direct challenge to your foundation.
So before proceeding to “point 2”, answer this clearly:
Explain how you justify moving from
“we currently lack evidence for X”
to
“therefore an intelligent uncaused first cause exists”
without committing an argument from ignorance or a category error.
Until that inferential bridge is justified, your sequence of points, however orderly, rests on an unsupported assumption.
If you want debate, address that.
If you repeat the questions again, you are simply confirming the avoidance.
Your move. Or be quiet.

TenQ:
If you can't face objective issues, you have no business with me!


Have a nice day!

I got banned....

You are still reframing instead of engaging.
I am not dodging. I am refusing a false setup.
Your questions are not neutral “yes or no” questions. They are structured to push respondents toward a predetermined conclusion. Repeating them and demanding short answers does not make them sound, it just increases pressure.
This is not an isolated issue. Across your topics, the same method appears repeatedly, tightly constrained questions, forced binaries, and control over format, all designed to funnel people toward the answer you want. That approach may work rhetorically online, but any serious academic or scientific setting would reject it outright. Inquiry does not begin with the conclusion already fixed.
You are also conflating three distinct domains and treating them as one:
Abiogenesis (origin of life)
Design inference (recognising human artefacts)
Metaphysical causation (origin of the universe)
They are not interchangeable.
On your questions 1–3.....
The absence of current laboratory replication is not evidence of impossibility, nor is it evidence of intelligence. “We do not yet know” does not logically become “therefore an intelligent uncaused first cause exists.” That is an argument from ignorance.
On your Mars building and painting examples,
Those analogies only work because we already have independent empirical knowledge of builders and painters. You do not have equivalent prior observation of universes being designed. Without that, the analogy fails.
You also do not get to dictate how I respond or reduce complex epistemological issues to “yes or no” answers to force a conclusion. That is not rational inquiry, it is rhetorical control.
If you want engagement, address this directly:
Explain how you justify moving from
“we don’t currently know how X happened”
to
“therefore an intelligent uncaused first cause exists”
without committing a category error or an argument from ignorance.
If you cannot do that, then the issue is not my organisation or honesty. The issue is that your foundation is unsound, and no amount of stacked questions will repair it.
Your move.

SkengRay:
You this boy again . After I dealt with you and you ran away. When something goes against the doctrine that was imposed on you, you'd start resulting to insult Brody don't waste your time on this guy he has been conditioned to the cage he can't see beyond the cage. I've tried schooling him on this all he did was Throw insults and tantrums pretty ironic for someone that claims to understand Christ Teachings . By the Way this are the type of Reaction you'd get from people because it goes against What they've been mentally enslaved too. Just like Jesus when he brought his concept of teaching which goes against the Judaism Religion practiced then. That was why he Was hanged by the people and Authorities.

Be quiet

SkengRay:
Clown . You couldn't disprove the truth you used insults and Ran for your life in fear . You guys are programmed to Fear What you don't know. Insulting People and you claim to know christ please Read What he Said in Matthew 5:22

Be quiet

SkengRay:
Oh My . I loved how you exposed his Childishness . I'm definitely sure he's a 14 year old kid catfishing as a Scandinavian

Be quiet

TenQ:
Debate is not lumping up unorganized thoughts and expecting a coherent response.

Again:
Your question was


I gave you a list of ten points that will lead you to the logical and scientific conclusion that an Intelligent Uncaused-First-Cause of Everything must exist.

My first point was:

1. Do you by any chance have any evidence of non-life bringing forth life or offspring?
2. Do you have any evidence of DNA being synthesised from non-life in the laboratory?
3. Do you think a non-biological intelligent system like an AI program can exist without an external intelligent organiser?


Before you go at tangent : I am not asking about synthesis of amino acids or inorganic compounds!


These are Yes or No questions and please back it up with relevant evidence if your answer is a YES!

4. Finally, if you go to Mars and find a building with Doors, Windows and functional compartments like living room, kitchen, store and bedroom that had been standing for more than a million years with no-one in sight, will you conclude that an Intelligent Builder must have built it or the earthquakes and Martian dust built it? Or on Mars, you find the picture of a horselike animal, with canvas, frame, nails, glue, shapes and colours will you conclude that the painting made itself?

Note: I never said:
You exist and you are an intelligent and rational creature.... therefore God!
A Building is the evidence of a Builder... therefore God.
A painting is the evidence of a Painter... therefore God!


I hope you can be rational, truthful, logical and scientific in your response. Please make your answers SHORT so that I can layout my second point

Stop dodging and reframing AND trying to force the answer you want. Rephrasing the same question is idiotic.

Do better.

SkengRay:
enough of the deflection . I've asked you to Point out the lie you can't and you do is use insult. Is that What Jesus taught you? You're are not following the teachings of Jesus you are only following his image.

Be quiet

SkengRay:
Still on your AI psychosis eh muchacho

A month away, did you finally afford data? Thats the problem, the unflushable Skengray and his accusations or like a bad smell that lingers

Step 1) pay £8.09 to buy Proton vpn

Step 2) get the paid gptzero AI detector the European one that looks exactly like mine its only £16 per month

And prove it.....

Until then be quiet mr unflushable