Dead Letter? Egyptian Necrophilia Law Called Hoax By Mubarak Supporter

We have been discussing the story that ran on various sites about the consideration of an Egyptian law that would allow husbands to have sex with their wives up to six hours after death. Our last blog noted that some were still reporting the story while others have questioned the truth of the story. Now a story below appears to have debunked the story, at least in part. While not addressing the alleged consideration of lowering the age for marriage of girls to 14, the story says that the “farewell intercourse” law claim was made by Amr Abdul Samea, a supporter of the deposed Hosni Mubarak. An Islamic cleric did in fact say that Muslim men (and women) could have sex with their dead spouses up to six hours after death, but there is no indication that this view was put into a proposed law.

The Moroccan cleric discussed in the prior blog is viewed obviously as a fringe figure among Muslims.

It does appear that Amr Abdul Samea has done a considerable disservice to those who are fighting the increasing hold of religious extremists in Egypt following the “Arab Spring.” The exaggeration has taken away from the needed attention to the plight of girls and women in Egypt who may face one of the greatest rollbacks in rights in modern history. We have already seen countries like Iran and Iraq rollback such rights. It is not clear what he thought he was accomplishing but his use of any means in political discourse was a signature of his former leader, Hosni Mubarak.

As for the necrophilia opinion of this cleric, the Muslims are not alone in having fringe religious figures.

Source: CSMonitor

38 thoughts on “Dead Letter? Egyptian Necrophilia Law Called Hoax By Mubarak Supporter”

  1. DHMC,

    Zealots of any faith are perverse….. Not just Islam……ask yourself…. Is your dog better because of it…. If not…. Then reexamine…..

  2. DHMC,

    If you only had a clue about fundies of any religious zealots you might understand….. But, since you have not a clue…It’d be like trying to explain to you that Obama is more right wing than you think….. But lack of understanding on your part does not mean I am incorrect in my understanding…..m

  3. AY, you simply have no understanding of religion. Try learning something before spouting off your naive anti-religious bigotry. Then your arguments might be effective.

    And Ralph, you are going to have to do better than cite Herodotus — who, it is generally accepted, was a brilliant fabulist. And you may have missed that the original story was based on second hand sources, so if that is your standard, by do you believe the original piece?

    Folks, just because it is politically fashionable to hate Islam, Muslims and Arabs (not that most people in this country have any idea about Muslim history or the teachings of Islam), that does not mean we should submit to casual bigotry evident in many of the posts about Islamic matters.

  4. Well, ID707 and DMC,

    A broad brush needs not as many strokes as a small one….. The point is you have fundies in each and every aspect of life…. Religion be damned….. It is the control of another humans will through manipulation…. In acts, words, deeds or fears…..i stand by, if it’s in the sharia… It’s the law…..

  5. Because this proposed Egyptian “Farewell Intercourse Law” story has gone viral through many non-mainstream websites and news outlets, and has not been covered at all by any mainstream outlets, even to address it as a rumor, it was, predictably, only a matter of time before some type of counter-response would be put out on the Internet.

    Within the last day, the Christian Science Monitor took the first of these steps in an attempt to shield Muslims from this bad publicity. The CS Monitor calls the story “hoey,” and cites, second-hand, an unamed “source inside the Egyptian Embassy in London” that told the Daily Mail that the legislation rumors were “completely false,” “forbidden in Islam,” and that the “source” “could never imagine it happening.”

    The CS Monitor, apparently, thinks it’s sufficient to cite a second-hand unnamed source as “evidence” that the story is a red-herring hoax, planted by a Mubarak loyalist. First of all, it’s hard to imagine that a Mubarak loyalist would be able to exercise any such free speech in Egypt. Second, the CS Monitor doesn’t bother to contact any genuine sources in Egypt that would go on the record to confirm or deny the story. So their labeling the story as “hoey” has no basis whatsoever, but we are, nonetheless, expected to reject the story on the ipse dixit of the CS Monitor’s editors.

    Even some of the Leftist blogs attempting to portray this story as a hoax acknowledge that such proposals were actually made some time ago. And to argue that such a proposed “Farewell Intercourse Law” could not possibly be real because it would be “forbidden in Islam” is nonsense. I suppose that this same “source” would assert that Muslims don’t drink alcholic beverages because it’s “forbidden in Islam.” Yeah, right. Moreover, If so-called “honor” murders are sanctioned by Islam and Sharia Law, it’s hardly far-fetched that such a “culture” would give the thumbs up to sex with a corpse.

    Finally, although it is not generally known or discussed, Necrophilia has LONG been a part of the Egyptian “culture” and Egyptians have been struggling among themselves over this perverse practice for CENTURIES. For example, Herodotus wrote in “The Histories” (dating back to 450s to the 420s BC) that to discourage intercourse with a corpse, Egyptians left deceased beautiful women to decay for three or four days. What this story tells us is that, although Necrophilia is bizarre to civilized people, this is not the case in Egypt.

    There’s an old saying that “you can’t make this stuff up.” That applies in this case as well. If the story did not have truth in it, then a representative of the government in Egypt would surely have come forward to confirm or deny.the story by now. But no. We only get second-hand heresay from some unnamed nobody that is supposed to be accepted as “evidence.” I don’t know about you, but that holds no water for me. Consequently, thus far, there’s no evidence of a hoax and the story still stands.

  6. TalkinDogfor Catholic Dogs 1, April 27, 2012 at 5:17 pm

    I dont think that many men would really do this. Six hours is a long time.

  7. I dont think that many men would really do this. Six hours is a long time.

  8. Anonymously, I would recommend you listen to the following interview (I posted a link to this once already: Note especially, on sharia: “It’s a huge oral tradition, which was set down in the 9th century and which was then, by some people, transformed into compulsion and rules,” Kadri tells Fresh Air’s Terry Gross. “It would be literally impossible to follow all of them, because plenty of them directly contradict each other. So you have to make choices, and Muslims have been making choices for … the last 1,400 years.” So one cannot say simply, “If it is in sharia it is in the law,” as you did — no more than one could say, “If it is in the Bible (or in the Torah and the Mishnah) it is in the law.” We will never be able to bridge the divide between the “West” and the Muslim world if we in the West do not have a proper understanding of Muslim thought and beliefs.

  9. Curious,
    Hope you noted my comment as a supportive one in re muslims.
    It was long, as I usually am, and gave historical facts about child brides in ancient Europe.

  10. Muslims’ everywhere please,please please get back to Quran & Sunnah. We are suppose to be the best of nations, show ALLAH that we are devouted in pleasing him. Remember all innovation is in the hellfire.

  11. The Christian Science Monitor article is excellent and debunks the story. This Islamic “cleric” is something like Terry Jones (FL Quran buring pastor). And just as Terry probably sent away for his divinity degree, the same can be done by a practitioner of Islam.

    It’s the Innertubzz, guys! Don’t believe everything you read.

  12. We ought not overlook what this tells us about our (most wonderful) selves. We were all quite willing accept an outrageous story without much doubt. I think this betrays our own predjudices in regards to Islam.

    I’m not sure what Gene meant by a “shift in depravity”. Is the burden now shifted to the author of what may be election propoganda? Or what..

  13. It’s possible that law is “being considered”. There are lots of laws “being considered” by our own Congress that go nowhere. I get fear-inducing emails about them more frequently than I like. I check them out, find that some nutter has submitted the same bill more than once. The bill never makes it out of committee but the email says it’s happening so be fearful and remember what the administration is doing when you vote in November. Of course it isn’t happening and the administration has nothing to do with it, for that matter, neither does the Congress except for one or two.

Comments are closed.