Australian Politics Forum - underage marriage in Sydney

Soren

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 25654
Gender: male

Re: underage marriage in Sydney
Reply #990 - Mar 19^th, 2014 at 10:04pm

Karnal wrote on Mar 19^th, 2014 at 8:49am:

It's been well over a month since the epidemic was announced,

Who announced the epidemic? You are the only one who has ever referred to it as an epidemic, and that for stupid rhetorical reasons.

The argument is not about an epidemic - the argument is about what justification do Muslims have for underage marriage? Underage not as 147 or even 16, but underage to no limit or... er... 9 years old.
The answer is, Islamic justification, the example of Mohammed. And once there is sharia law, there is an epidemic - see all the most enthusiastic Muslim countries.

The socioeconomic (pseudo-Marxist-Leninist) argument blaming poverty and social condition hold oddly true in said enthusiastic Muslim countries sans oil. Except it doesn't identify the source of poverty and backwardness., or misidentifies it as some Marxist materialistic old nonsense.
Islam - ideology - unaided by oil produces fairly uniformly backward and poor, riven countries. Is Islam to blame for their poverty and backwardness or is Islam the result of class struggle? You will labour that aspect, PB, it's your kind of nonsense.

The more Islam you have in a country, the poorer and more backward it is. Mind over matter, innit. Add oil and they have money - but they are still backward. Islam and Mohammed's example matter.

Back to top

IP Logged

Soren

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 25654
Gender: male

Re: underage marriage in Sydney
Reply #991 - Mar 19^th, 2014 at 10:47pm

Council of Islamic Ideology declares women’s existence anti-Islamic

MARCH 15, 2014 BY KHABARISTAN TODAY

Islamabad - Sharia Correspondent: The Council of Islamic Ideology (CII) concluded their 192nd meeting on Thursday with the ruling that women are un-Islamic and that their mere existence contradicted Sharia and the will of Allah. As the meeting concluded CII Chairman Maulana Muhammad Khan Shirani noted that women by existing defied the laws of nature, and to protect Islam and the Sharia women should be forced to stop existing as soon as possible. The announcement comes a couple of days after CII’s 191st meeting where they dubbed laws related to minimum marriage age to be un-Islamic.

After declaring women to be un-Islamic, Shirani explained that there were actually two kinds of women – haraam and makrooh. “We can divide all women in the world into two distinct categories: those who are haraam and those who are makrooh. Now the difference between haraam and makrooh is that the former is categorically forbidden while the latter is really really disliked,” Shirani said.
http://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/2014/03/15/comment/coucil-of-islamic-ideology-de...

A joke? It's from Pakistan, so probably not... Or therefore is.

Back to top

IP Logged

Sir Eoin O Fada Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 3372 New England, NSW Gender:	Re: underage marriage in Sydney Reply #992 - Mar 20^th, 2014 at 12:35am FD, If I am confused it is by your use of English.
Back to top	Self defence is a right. IP Logged

Pete Waldo

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 503
U.S.
Gender: male

Re: underage marriage in Sydney
Reply #993 - Mar 20^th, 2014 at 1:31am

freediver wrote on Mar 19^th, 2014 at 6:59pm:

I stand corrected. You did not confuse me with Karnal. You are just confused. I did not mean that whether people worship Richard influences whether he actually was a pedophile. I meant that it influenced whether I care about it. If people stopped using Muhammed's example to justify modern pedophilia, no-one at all would care whether he had sex with a 9 year old girl. It would go from being a curse on humanity to a trivial historical detail.

Though the thread regards marriage, and if Muhammad is the example, then 6 years old is perfectly acceptable to marry off to a 53 year old lecher:

(7) Narrated Hisham's father: Khadija died three years before the Prophet departed to Medina. He stayed there for two years or so and then he married 'aisha when she was a girl of
six
years of age, and he consumed that marriage when she was nine years old. (Book #58, Hadith #236)

(8) Narrated 'aisha: that the Prophet married her when she was
six
years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years (i.e., till his death). (Book #62, Hadith #64)

Regarding sex, of course there's always mufa’khathat:
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1390658615

Back to top

Truth can never be told so as to be understood and not be believed. ~ William Blake

IP Logged

Karnal

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 100476

Re: underage marriage in Sydney
Reply #994 - Mar 20^th, 2014 at 8:59am

Soren wrote on Mar 19^th, 2014 at 10:04pm:

Karnal wrote on Mar 19^th, 2014 at 8:49am:

It's been well over a month since the epidemic was announced,

Who announced the epidemic? You are the only one who has ever referred to it as an epidemic, and that for stupid rhetorical reasons.

The argument is not about an epidemic - the argument is about what justification do Muslims have for underage marriage?

Where'd you get that one from, old boy? Read the original posts in the thread. Read the thread title.

This thread is about Muslims selling their daughters overseas on Facebook. It's about an epidemic of underage Muslim marriages, citing hundreds of cases using non-Muslim, non-married census data. It's about the marriage of a Central Coast girl, 12, to a foreign student with the consent of her father.

You've tried hard to turn it into a thread about the Muslim justification of underage marriage, but you haven't had a lot of luck, I have to say. You haven't posted any real evidence of that either - your best evidence was the zero marriage age in 3 hardline Muslim countries.

I'm pained to say it's been all downhill from there, old fruit.

Back to top

IP Logged

Karnal Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 100476	Re: underage marriage in Sydney Reply #995 - Mar 20^th, 2014 at 9:01am Soren wrote on Mar 19^th, 2014 at 10:04pm: The more Islam you have in a country, the poorer and more backward it is. Mind over matter, innit. You forgot to add tinted, old boy. Always, absolutely, never ever. Rich tapestry, innit.
Back to top	IP Logged

Karnal

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 100476

Re: underage marriage in Sydney
Reply #996 - Mar 20^th, 2014 at 9:18am

Soren wrote on Mar 19^th, 2014 at 10:47pm:

Council of Islamic Ideology declares women’s existence anti-Islamic

MARCH 15, 2014 BY KHABARISTAN TODAY

Islamabad - Sharia Correspondent: The Council of Islamic Ideology (CII) concluded their 192nd meeting on Thursday with the ruling that women are un-Islamic and that their mere existence contradicted Sharia and the will of Allah. As the meeting concluded CII Chairman Maulana Muhammad Khan Shirani noted that women by existing defied the laws of nature, and to protect Islam and the Sharia women should be forced to stop existing as soon as possible. The announcement comes a couple of days after CII’s 191st meeting where they dubbed laws related to minimum marriage age to be un-Islamic.

After declaring women to be un-Islamic, Shirani explained that there were actually two kinds of women – haraam and makrooh. “We can divide all women in the world into two distinct categories: those who are haraam and those who are makrooh. Now the difference between haraam and makrooh is that the former is categorically forbidden while the latter is really really disliked,” Shirani said.
http://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/2014/03/15/comment/coucil-of-islamic-ideology-de...

A joke? It's from Pakistan, so probably not... Or therefore is.

And therefore is. The story comes from a jokey blog.

It is a jolly world, no?

Back to top

IP Logged

Sir Eoin O Fada

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 3372
New England, NSW
Gender: male

Re: underage marriage in Sydney
Reply #997 - Mar 20^th, 2014 at 9:47am

The relevant point about the marriage of Muhammad and Aisha and its consummation when she was nine is that it is not an example of paedophilia, and it would not have been considered so in our European society at that time, so to use it as justification for the vilification of Muhammad today is not only unjust but shews a distinct lack of historical knowledge.

In most of Europe the minimum legal age for marriage of girls was seven (7) years of age up until relatively recent times.

Example:
Quote:

The American colonies followed the English tradition, but the law was more of a guide. For example, Mary Hathaway (Virginia, 1689) was only 9 when she was married to William Williams. Sir Edward Coke (England, 17th century) made it clear that "the marriage of girls under 12 was normal, and the age at which a girl who was a wife was eligible for a dower from her husband's estate was 9 even though her husband be only four years old."[2] Reliable data for when people would actually marry is very difficult to find. In England, for....

From Wikipedia "Marriageable age".

Let he who is without a similar history cast the first metaphorical stone Roll Eyes

Back to top

Self defence is a right.

IP Logged

Soren

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 25654
Gender: male

Re: underage marriage in Sydney
Reply #998 - Mar 20^th, 2014 at 9:51am

Karnal wrote on Mar 20^th, 2014 at 8:59am:

Soren wrote on Mar 19^th, 2014 at 10:04pm:

Karnal wrote on Mar 19^th, 2014 at 8:49am:

It's been well over a month since the epidemic was announced,

Who announced the epidemic? You are the only one who has ever referred to it as an epidemic, and that for stupid rhetorical reasons.

The argument is not about an epidemic - the argument is about what justification do Muslims have for underage marriage?

Where'd you get that one from, old boy? Read the original posts in the thread. Read the thread title.

This thread is about Muslims selling their daughters overseas on Facebook. It's about an epidemic of underage Muslim marriages, citing hundreds of cases using non-Muslim, non-married census data. It's about the marriage of a Central Coast girl, 12, to a foreign student with the consent of her father.

You've tried hard to turn it into a thread about the Muslim justification of underage marriage, but you haven't had a lot of luck, I have to say. You haven't posted any real evidence of that either - your best evidence was the zero marriage age in 3 hardline Muslim countries.

I'm pained to say it's been all downhill from there, old fruit.

Title:
underage marriage in Sydney

OP:
http://www.news.com.au/national/nsw-act/alleged-underage-marriage-uncovered-when...

Astonished that no one has posted this yet.

This is of serious concern which warrants some serious level-headed discussion (fat chance I know). As both the Islamic health service and the state government acknowledge, this is "far more prevalent and well-known than people think".

The islamic community in Sydney needs to take responsibility here and tackle this disturbing issue head on.

Headline at the linky:
Alleged underage marriage uncovered when a 12-year-old child bride and husband, 26, tried to apply for spousal benefits

No mention of epidemic anywhere until you turned up, PB.

Back to top

IP Logged

Sir Eoin O Fada

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 3372
New England, NSW
Gender: male

Re: underage marriage in Sydney
Reply #999 - Mar 20^th, 2014 at 10:00am

This bit was left out:
Quote:

The CII meeting also advised the government that to protect Islam women’s right to breathe should also be taken away from them. “Whether a woman is allowed to breathe or not be left up to her husband or male guardian, and no woman under any circumstance whatsoever should be allowed to decide whether she can breathe or not,” Shirani said

Back to top

Self defence is a right.

IP Logged

polite_gandalf

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 20027
Canberra
Gender: male

Re: underage marriage in Sydney
Reply #1000 - Mar 20^th, 2014 at 10:18am

Sir Eoin O Fada wrote on Mar 20^th, 2014 at 9:47am:

The relevant point about the marriage of Muhammad and Aisha and its consummation when she was nine is that it is not an example of paedophilia, and it would not have been considered so in our European society at that time, so to use it as justification for the vilification of Muhammad today is not only unjust but shews a distinct lack of historical knowledge.

FD's (and others) argument is slightly more nuanced than that. They point to muslims around the world who refer to Muhammad and say that marriage (ie consummation) to 9 year old girls is a-ok. This is a legitimate criticism and I stand with them in condemning that rationalisation. But where they trip over themselves is in dogmatically assuming that unless muslims reject the example of Muhammad (something muslims cannot do), it is quite impossible for any muslim to say it is wrong to marry a 9 year old today. As with most issues, the islam-bashers are on the exact same page as the islamic extremists.

But both the islamic extremists and the islam-bashers are wrong. Muslims absolutely can and should condemn marriage to 9 year olds today. And doing so does not reject the Prophet's example, and here's why: the "example" of the Prophet in this case was to strictly hold off marriage and sexual relationships until both the bride and groom are biologically and emotionally mature enough to cope with it. Everything islam teaches us about marriage - mutual love and respect for each other and especially the emphasis on each party making their own free choices, is consistent with mental maturity being an essential prerequisite for marriage. That is all encapsulated in the 3 year wait Muhammad had before marrying his betrothed. In that time and place, that age of maturity, while obviously always fluid, was undeniably a lot lower than it is today. Whether Aisha was 9, or (more likely according to more recent research) around 16-18 at the time of consummation, the actual numeric age should not be taken as the ultimate guide for muslims. The most important thing is physical and emotional maturity, and in this day and age, we have pretty much institutionalised around 17-18 as that magical figure. And while this figure is essentially arbitrary, the fact that it has become entrenched in the psyche of our culture means that muslims are pretty much bound by this standard - IMO.

Now watch while FD has a field day over this.

Back to top

A resident Islam critic who claims to represent western values said:
Quote:

Outlawing the enemy's uniform - hijab, islamic beard - is not depriving one's own people of their freedoms.

IP Logged

Karnal

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 100476

Re: underage marriage in Sydney
Reply #1001 - Mar 20^th, 2014 at 11:40am

G, to summarise: Muhammed's example of 9 is just an arbitrary age for consumation, not a proscribed minimum consumation age.

And a juristiction's legal age of consent can form a guide for Muslims on the emotional and biological age of consumation - "theologically" speaking.

This makes some sense. Age of consent laws would be irrelevant in hardline Muslim juristictions where sex outside of marriage is illegal, or against Islam. Therefore, evidence of Muslims in defacto relationships are completely irrelevant to a legalistic discussion on Islam.

This would be the same as discussing the church's role in sanctifying unmarried relationships in the more hardline Bible Belt communities - fundamentalist churches don't condone sex outside marriage at all.

While we have a legal age of sexual consent, its legal application is fraught with complications. In 1901, Australia had a minimum "marriage age" - age of consent laws are a modern phenomenon. The concept of consent itself is a modern phenomenon.

This is shaded by a whole host of factors but importantly, in English-speaking countries, Victorian notions of chastity and child welfare - a paradigm that has been reinterpreted by more recent feminist theories on consent and girls' sexuality.

Theorists in the sexual assault field argue that a legal age of consent is irrelevant in determining consensual sex. They argue that the age of consent is an arbitrary line in the sand. Factors that influence sexual consent (or its lack) include physical size, status, threats or intimidation, and age difference. It IS possible to consent to sex under the age of 16, and it is possible for non-consensual (or coerced) sex to occur over that age.

In traditional feudal societies, of course, almost ALL marriages would be classed as unconsensual by modern standards. The arranged marriage of children can hardly be described as consensual. Ultimately, this is the difference between Western notions of consent and marriage in traditional societies. We have a completely different idea of relationships, gender roles and sexuality.

One of the biggest taboos in honour-based societies is unmarried sex, or adultery. In Saudi Arabia, this is punishable by death. In countries like India, people take the law into their own hands, and kill women believed to be adulterers. Many girls who have been raped in India commit suicide. In traditional societies, the shame of unmarried sex, and even sexual assault, is placed on women, not men.

It's important to place the arbitrary age for consumation within Islam into this context, but equally, our own arbitrary age of sexual consent has its own context, based on the equality of consenting partners.

Back to top

IP Logged

Soren

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 25654
Gender: male

Re: underage marriage in Sydney
Reply #1002 - Mar 20^th, 2014 at 11:45am

Karnal wrote on Mar 20^th, 2014 at 9:01am:

Soren wrote on Mar 19^th, 2014 at 10:04pm:

The more Islam you have in a country, the poorer and more backward it is. Mind over matter, innit.

You forgot to add tinted, old boy. Always, absolutely, never ever.

Rich tapestry, innit.

Well, if you look at white converts - I am sorry, reverts - you'll see that pigmentation is irrelevant. It is all mind over matter.

Back to top

IP Logged

freediver

Gold Member

Offline

www.ozpolitic.com

Posts: 52177
At my desk.

Re: underage marriage in Sydney
Reply #1003 - Mar 20^th, 2014 at 1:23pm

Sir Eoin O Fada wrote on Mar 20^th, 2014 at 12:35am:

FD,

If I am confused it is by your use of English.

What language would you prefer?

Quote:

so to use it as justification for the vilification of Muhammad today

Like I said, no one would care about Muhammed if there were not millions of Muslims in the world today holding up his example as an eternal one for all of mankind to follow. This is not an argument about historical standards, but about modern standards. It is Muslims that make Muhammed's example relevant, not his critics.

Quote:

FD's (and others) argument is slightly more nuanced than that. They point to muslims around the world who refer to Muhammad and say that marriage (ie consummation) to 9 year old girls is a-ok.

I believe it was you who said this, about Shites. I tend to go with Abu's position - if there is grass on the wicket, it's time to play cricket.

Quote:

This is a legitimate criticism and I stand with them in condemning that rationalisation. But where they trip over themselves is in dogmatically assuming that unless muslims reject the example of Muhammad (something muslims cannot do), it is quite impossible for any muslim to say it is wrong to marry a 9 year old today.

Strawman. Muslims say whatever they think people want to hear.

Quote:

But both the islamic extremists and the islam-bashers are wrong. Muslims absolutely can and should condemn marriage to 9 year olds today.

on "legal and ethical" grounds.

Quote:

Everything islam teaches us about marriage - mutual love and respect for each other and especially the emphasis on each party making their own free choices, is consistent with mental maturity being an essential prerequisite for marriage.

It would be nice if that was what it actually taught. You have to be extremely selective to pull anything like that out of Islam. You have to ignore mainstream Islam and all the specific directives from Muhammed and focus on a select few vague waffly bits, around which you can invent just about any principle you want (as Gandalf does).

Quote:

Whether Aisha was 9, or (more likely according to more recent research) around 16-18

Crap.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Mar 20^th, 2014 at 1:37pm by freediver »

People who can't distinguish between etymology and entomology bug me in ways I cannot put into words.

IP Logged

Sir Eoin O Fada

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 3372
New England, NSW
Gender: male

Re: underage marriage in Sydney
Reply #1004 - Mar 20^th, 2014 at 2:19pm

FD,
Quote:

Like I said, no one would care about Muhammed if there were not millions of Muslims in the world today holding up his example as an eternal one for all of mankind to follow. This is not an argument about historical standards, but about modern standards. It is Muslims that make Muhammed's example relevant, not his critics.

I agree and my argument based on modern standards is that such standards should also be about recognizing that today's standards cannot be applied to a person who lived in the 6th and 7th Centuries.
It lowers our standards to calumniate him, he was what he was, an extraordinary man by any criteria.
Just for the record it is my opinion that all Muslim migration to this country should be stopped and that the practice of the religion, and any manifestation of it in public, should be banned.

Back to top

Self defence is a right.

IP Logged