At a time of rising alarm over the marriage of girls as young as eight years old, Saudi Arabia’s Grand Mufti Abdul Aziz al-Sheikh has declared that such marriages are proper and moral under Sharia law. Indeed, he views such criticism as unfair to these girls despite the fact that such arrangements are viewed as per se child abuse and statutory rape in most other countries.
The Grand Mufti insists “[i]f it is said that a woman below 15 cannot be married, that is wrong. If a girl exceeds 10 or 12 then she is eligible for marriage, and whoever thinks she is too young, then he or she is wrong and has done her an injustice.”
Nevertheless, this week a court in Taif allowed an eleven-year-old to divorce her 75-year-old husband.
She is fortunate in comparison to the eight-year-old girl near Riyadh, who was denied a divorce to a 58-year-old man — at least until she reaches the age of majority.
For the full story, click here.
Jack of all trades master of running his mouth.
Only thing fake is you Mr.computer repair man/lawyer/astrologist and what ever other hats you think fit you.
I see it’s working out just about as well as all your other tactical missteps. You are truly a bad troll, badtroll.
And I’m not using “bad” in the ironic inverse manner.
Bdaman,
And yet it is upon these two men and their families that the bigotry of the right will fall. And I will fight such behavior openly and forcefully until the day I die.
How’s that fake sympathy tactic working out for you, badtroll? (rhetorical, we all saw how well it worked when you tried it on AY yesterday)
Blouise doctors typically have no boundaries and I am pleased that your grandchild is receiving the best of care from these two gentleman.
Two exceptional doctors at the cleve clinic, both from Pakistan and muslim, saved the life of my 1 year old grandchild … and are working, presently, to keep the child whole and healthy.
That anyone would attempt, for mere political purposes, to create any discomfort for these gentle men or for their families, is a thing I will fight against with every ounce of strength I possess.
Make no mistake … this sentiment runs very deep within me.
“The bluntly-named group ‘Stop Islamization in America’ has posted signs on the sides of metro buses across the country this summer, reading: ‘Fatwa on your head?’ and ‘Leaving Islam?’ Pamela Geller, who heads the organization, says she just wants to help out Muslims endangered by their own religion.
Funny: I don’t believe I’ve seen any signs yet reading: “Priest molesting you in the confession booth? Leaving Catholicism?”
There is a new and disturbing trend towards Muslim bashing in the United States. If it continues apace it is likely to help stir up a real national ‘clash of civilizations.’ Too bad. The American Muslims I know are some of the most open-minded and tolerant practitioners of the Islamic faith.
Witness Newt Gingrich’s bizarre stance on the planned Muslim community center two blocks from the World Trade Center with a mosque on one floor: ‘There should be no mosque near Ground Zero in New York so long as there are no churches or synagogues in Saudi Arabia,’ he contends.
Is he saying we should be just as intolerant as some of the world’s most authoritarian governments? It certainly sounds like it.
Folks jumping on the anti-Muslim bandwagon this summer might like to recall that America’s founders stressed religious tolerance for a reason: Minority faiths deserve the same protection as all faiths, particularly because they are likely to be the first ones persecuted by the majority. Maybe that is why Thomas Jefferson bothered to read his own Koran. The father of the nation, George Washington, harbored no anxiety towards other religions on American soil. In one instance, he wrote this to his agent about hiring workmen at Mount Vernon: ‘If they be good workmen, they may be from Asia, Africa, or Europe; they may be Mohammedans, Jews, or Christians of any sect, or they may be Atheists.’
Gingrich and his brethren are now trying to stir up new fears about Islam in America. His clique has little credibility, however.”
Read the rest at Newt Gingrich’s New Clash of Civilizations
I don’t have to respond to your questions any more than you have to tell the truth, TraitorB. Take your false dilemmas and spin on them.
Oh, wait. That’s what you are doing already.
Carry on.
You avoided the question of the legitimacy of our annexation of the SW. Do you think it was legitimate or do you agree with Abraham Lincoln?
Trader B don’t know if you ever read or heard this.
http://online.wsj.com/article/NA_WSJ_PUB:SB123051100709638419.html
By the way, how did that Newt you ate for breakfast taste?
What I believe is that you’re simply full of crap, Propagandist.
Fractionation may happen, but not for the reasons you suggest.
Buddha,
There is some talk of dividing America. Rick Perry has suggested that possibility for Texas some time in the future.
For example, do you believe the Mexican War was legitimate? The Mexicans do not. Then Representative Abraham Lincoln spoke out against it. Thus, it is not impossible that Hispanics could convince Liberals to return the SW to Mexico. I have seen some footage of a meeting for this purpose (in CA, as I recall.) The speaker was a teacher, but he was speaking outside of school, so he could not be fired.
If the Muslims become the majority in the Northeast, they might want to split off and form a Muslim theocracy. They could make a deal with the fundamentalist in the South to secede.
That changes nothing, badtroll.
AIG is not the government. They are a corporation. And just like a kosher deli can sell a religiously defined product or a Christian publisher can sell books that religiously defined products, AIG is free to sell financial religiously defined products. I don’t see you getting upset that ElderAdo Financial offering Christian based financial services (http://www.prestigeadvisors.com/christian.htm).
But that’s not in line with your bigoted agenda, is it?
None of these businesses are the equivalent of NYC adopting Sharia courts to run parallel to the civil and/or criminal courts – which would be an example of “Sharia coming to America” – but short of that kind of direct (and unconstitutional) governmental action, Sharia isn’t going to be incorporated into our legal system absent Constitutional amendment.
Again, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof” U.S. Constitution, 1st Amendment.
Congress = venal not suicidally stupid.
If they (meaning both parties) tried to do something like that? The Fundie base the GOP has been kissing ass with for the last 30 years would start burning them in the streets like heretics of yesteryear. Because they are just as insane as the Islamic Fundamentalists.
The ONLY way to “bring Sharia” to New York or any place else in America is by Constitutional Amendment. Do you really think Congress would amend the Constitution to allow Sharia law?
If the majority in Congress ever becomes Muslim I don’t see why it couldn’t happen. We already have seen where a large population of the Muslim community help put a Muslim in Congress where he took his oath on the Koran.
Change takes time, never say never.
Let us not forget AIG
AIG, Sharia and Uncle Sam
A federal judge in Michigan has declined to dismiss an ex-Marine’s lawsuit that insurance giant AIG is using tax dollars to promote Islamic Sharia law and charities that may be funneling money to terrorist organizations.
Just when you thought the government’s massive bailout of AIG couldn’t get more complicated or controversial.
The facts of the case “raise a question of whether the government’s involvement with AIG has created the effect of promoting religion and sufficiently raise Plaintiff’s claim beyond the speculative level,” U.S. Dist. Judge Lawrence P. Zatkoff ruled.
The judge’s ruling, a surprise to many legal scholars who think the suit will never go to trial, adds a troubling religious dimension to an already troubling economic crisis. It also shines a spotlight on Sharia-compliant financing, a growing part of the $1 trillion Islamic banking industry.
http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/undergod/2009/05/aig_sharia_and_uncle_sam.html
oops posters or is that posers
These poster like Traitor B are desperately trying to stir the anti-muslim, anti-black and anti-mexican sentiment in this country. It is the republican fall election strategy. They want to scare these groups into staying home and turn out the angry white racists.
If we’re lucky, they’ll eliminate the racist bigoted divisionist trolls too.
“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof” U.S. Constitution, 1st Amendment.
So, once again TraitorB, you’re simply expressing the bigoted and racist sentiments of your boss and attempting to be a shit disturber. The ONLY way to “bring Sharia” to New York or any place else in America is by Constitutional Amendment. Do you really think Congress would amend the Constitution to allow Sharia law? They’re venal, not suicidally stupid. But you run that up the flag pole and see who salutes by all means, be my guest.
Because the chance of that happening is about the same chance as your boy PropagAndy has at being taken seriously ever again.
Which is zero.
Here is a comparison of Sharia and our legal system. Note that they eliminate lawyers.
http://the-american-catholic.com/2010/06/25/sharia-law-and-the-u-s-constitution/