Any - I wasn't equating civil rights activists with religious believers, just stating that science and the proofs deriving therefrom is not the neutral force some rationalists like to posit it as.
Also, you have repeatedly called someone commenting here mentally ill. That isn't a lie.
Anyway, since you consider holding any sort of religious faith to be demeaning and humiliating, why on earth are you claiming some big distinction with regards to the source of someone's religious faith? Are we meant to be reassured that according to you, only people who believe because of a book are "incredibly gullible, possibly mentally ill, possibly educationally subnormal, then."
And you can stop stomping your feet and suggesting I leave the thread. I'll post where I wish.
Hop - I've seen plenty of translations mention that as either "Not had menstruation", or "not had menstruation yet", it is certainly not censored. There are many reasons why someone may not have had periods, so it doesn't specifically refer to pre-pubescent brides, nor it is the verse encouraging child rape that someone up thread promised existed. We know that child brides existed both prior to Islam and for many centuries afterwards, in many cultures, but there is nothing in the Quran that specifically encourages the practice, which I think is an important distinction to make.