NationStates Jolt Archive

The debate over the controversial practice of child marriage in Saudi Arabia was pushed back into the spotlight this week, with the kingdom's top cleric saying that it's OK for girls as young as 10 to wed.


Saudi cleric Sheikh Abdul Aziz Al-Sheikh says it's OK for a girl aged 10 or 12 to get married.

"It is incorrect to say that it's not permitted to marry off girls who are 15 and younger," Sheikh Abdul Aziz Al-Sheikh, the kingdom's grand mufti, said in remarks quoted Wednesday in the regional Al-Hayat newspaper. "A girl aged 10 or 12 can be married. Those who think she's too young are wrong and they are being unfair to her."

The issue of child marriage has been a hot-button topic in the deeply conservative kingdom in recent weeks.

In December, Saudi judge Sheikh Habib Abdallah al-Habib refused to annul the marriage of an 8-year-old girl to a 47-year-old man.

The judge rejected a petition from the girl's mother, whose lawyer said the marriage was arranged by her father to settle a debt with "a close friend." The judge required the girl's husband to sign a pledge that he would not have sex with her until she reaches puberty.

Al-Sheikh was asked during a lecture Monday about parents forcing their underage daughters to marry.

"We hear a lot in the media about the marriage of underage girls," he said, according to the newspaper. "We should know that Shariah law has not brought injustice to women."

Don't Miss
Saudi judge refuses to annul marriage of girl, 8
Christoph Wilcke, a Saudi Arabia researcher for Human Rights Watch, recently told CNN that his organization has heard many other cases of child marriages.

"We've been hearing about these types of cases once every four or five months because the Saudi public is now able to express this kind of anger, especially so when girls are traded off to older men," Wilcke said.

Wilcke explained that while Saudi ministries may make decisions designed to protect children, "It is still the religious establishment that holds sway in the courts, and in many realms beyond the court."

Last month, Zuhair al-Harithi, a spokesman for the Saudi government-run Human Rights Commission, said his organization is fighting against child marriages.

"The Human Rights Commission opposes child marriages in Saudi Arabia," al-Harithi said. "Child marriages violate international agreements that have been signed by Saudi Arabia and should not be allowed." He added that his organization has been able to intervene and stop at least one child marriage from taking place.

Wajeha al-Huwaider, co-founder of the Society of Defending Women's Rights in Saudi Arabia, told CNN in December that achieving human rights in the kingdom means standing against those who want to "keep us backward and in the dark ages."

She said the marriages cause girls to "lose their sense of security and safety. Also, it destroys their feeling of being loved and nurtured. It causes them a lifetime of psychological problems and severe depression."

The Saudi Ministry of Justice has not made any public comment on the issue.

Source: http://edition.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/01/17/saudi.child.marriage/index.html?iref=mpstoryview

Well, at least bringing some of Saudi Arabias arcane cultural practices back into the spotlight might inspire enough outrage so that people will be more active in stopping these kind of happenings, particularly people within the country itself. Don't turn this into a useless debate about whether or not Islam condones child marriage, most Muslims in the 21st century don't and its a counter-productive discussion. What does everyone here think about this news item?

I think it is old news that this happens, and I think it is nobody's business but the Saudis what they do. I mean, I'd be all up for an invasion and shit, but since we can't afford it...

Also, in before ebil moslems &c.

Saudi Clerics are pedophiles. Also, In before Ebil Moslems.

I think it is old news that this happens, and I think it is nobody's business but the Saudis what they do. I mean, I'd be all up for an invasion and shit, but since we can't afford it...

Also, in before ebil moslems &c.

we could pay for an invasion of saudi by canceling the debt they hold on us.
two birds with one stone.

we could pay for an invasion of saudi by canceling the debt they hold on us.
two birds with one stone.

Yanno, that's a good plan. Officer thinking Mr. Death.

Yanno, that's a good plan. Officer thinking Mr. Death.

the army keeps trying to get me back in as a officer.

Oddly enough, a better case could be made for Saudi involvement in 9-11 than for the alleged Iraqi connection...

the army keeps trying to get me back in as a officer.

Makes sense to me. With thinking like that (and the can do attitude) you should be put in command of at least a division.

Oddly enough, a better case could be made for Saudi involvement in 9-11 than for the alleged Iraqi connection...

that's presidential thinking. someone shoot obama we got a new guy to put in power.



[disclaimer for secret service not serious do not arrest me]

They have to start thinking of women as something other than baby factories before they can make any kind of progress in this area.

They have to start thinking of women as something other than baby factories before they can make any kind of progress in this area.

ha then that going to take forever

[disclaimer for secret service not serious do not arrest me]

Dosen't matter. What do you think happend to that one guy from Whitest Kids U'Know?

ha then that going to take forever

exactly.

That's a whole big mess of creepers in that article. Sad fuckers. Didn't Mohammed marry a nine year old girl or something himself? I think I remember reading something along those lines.

Change in mentality takes time, and usually does not start with the "establishment".

Good for Saudi Arabia that this discussion is starting to take place there, and let's allow them time to sort this out themselves and support them in trying to make a change, instead of condemning them for the situation as it currently is and has been for centuries.

So let's not make hollow threats and try to force them into quick decisions, which will almost certainly not be the best ones for them, even if it satisfies some of our lust for enforcing Western standards upon everyone.

But then, what's new about that... :(

And yeah, I'm being unusually serious today. Gotta stop doing that! :D

One of the few good things about the Iraq War Mark 1 led by George the First was that Saudi women saw female GIs driving vehicles through Ryiadh. Some Saudi women thought it was great and they started to drive cars alone throgh saudi streets. They were locked up and their husbands had to go and bail them out.

In Iran women are pushing the boundaries and demanding freedom. The Internet is globalising the world in good ways and in bad.
It's up to people in all countries to liberate themselves but we can encourage them!

One of the few good things about the Iraq War Mark 1 led by George the First was that Saudi women saw female GIs driving vehicles through Ryiadh. Some Saudi women thought it was great and they started to drive cars alone throgh saudi streets. They were locked up and their husbands had to go and bail them out.

In Iran women are pushing the boundaries and demanding freedom. The Internet is globalising the world in good ways and in bad.
It's up to people in all countries to liberate themselves but we can encourage them!

Collectivity secretly runs hundreds of pirate radio stations that send messages of hope throughout the airwaves of many of the world's most oppressive nations! With locations such as North Korea, Cambodia, Iran, and The United States of America.

SaintB I wish I did because I'd make you one of the leading disc jockeys for these pirate radio stations.
Actually, I have appeared on community radio shows and hosted a debate on Marxism versus Anarchism for community television.

SaintB I wish I did because I'd make you one of the leading disc jockeys for these pirate radio stations.

And I think I would happily take that job.


Actually, I have appeared on community radio shows and hosted a debate on Marxism versus Anarchism for community television.

Cool.

I am glad you realized that I was making a joke while simultaneously supporting what you said; some people get mad about it because they lack the requisite sense of humor.

He's right of course. Two consenting adults should not be allowed to marry if they happen to be of the same sex, but an adult with a child is perfectly fine. In case of it being an older man marying a young girl (which I daresay will be mostly the case), labia and clit are to be removed first of course -otherwise she may consider cheating with boys her own age.

That's a whole big mess of creepers in that article. Sad fuckers. Didn't Mohammed marry a nine year old girl or something himself? I think I remember reading something along those lines.

Aisha, yes. Her age at the consummation of the marriage is not entirely certain, but is generally put below 12, but after her first period.

I do however seem to recall it was a marriage to keep her away from her abusive parents who wanted to sell her into slavery or something like that, and that he was obligated to consummate the marriage to not have it annulled by law (and hence seeing her return to a life of certain misery and so on).

Unfortunately it seems some muslims do not interpret this as "sometimes one has to do a lesser evil to prevent a greater one" but as "fucking kids is fine cause the prophet did it".

"fucking kids is fine cause the prophet did it".

Explains volumes about the culture don't you think?

That's a whole big mess of creepers in that article. Sad fuckers. Didn't Mohammed marry a nine year old girl or something himself? I think I remember reading something along those lines.
To be fair, I doubt we were so enlightened in the sixth century either.

To be fair, I doubt we were so enlightened in the sixth century either.

Dunno about you, I was born a bit later than that, so "we" weren't yet. :D

He's right of course. Two consenting adults should not be allowed to marry if they happen to be of the same sex, but an adult with a child is perfectly fine. In case of it being an older man marying a young girl (which I daresay will be mostly the case), labia and clit are to be removed first of course -otherwise she may consider cheating with boys her own age.

Sometimes I think the more I learn about a culture the less tolerant of them I am, instead of the reverse.

To be fair, I doubt we were so enlightened in the sixth century either.

I don't know, how enlightened do you have to be to not diddle kids?

Explains volumes about the culture don't you think?

To be fair, interpreting religious tenets and supposedly moral examples for ones own twisted ends aren't something exclusive to any one culture or religion. Twisted people exist everywhere, and religion is a good vehicle for legitimizing deviant behavior if you can get yourself declared an authority on it.

To be fair, interpreting religious tenets and supposedly moral examples for ones own twisted ends aren't something exclusive to any one culture or religion. Twisted people exist everywhere, and religion is a good vehicle for legitimizing deviant behavior if you can get yourself declared an authority on it.

Also true.

Sometimes I think the more I learn about a culture the less tolerant of them I am, instead of the reverse.

I know exactly what you mean.

I don't know, how enlightened do you have to be to not diddle kids?

Clearly this is a lesson that Catholic Church hasn't learned yet, and it's the 21st century.

Clearly this is a lesson that Catholic Church hasn't learned yet, and it's the 21st century.

Yep because the church actually goes out and says it is alright and it was only Catholic priests that did this, not priests from other religions and everybody who has done this has been a priest :rolleyes:

I don't know, how enlightened do you have to be to not diddle kids?

I think its more the definition of kids has changed over the past few centuries.

For example it no longer means cheap labour.

I read this as "Tom Cruise sees nothing wrong with child marriage" O_o

I read this as "Tom Cruise sees nothing wrong with child marriage" O_o

Those crazy Scientologists. What will they think of next? Some sort of tale where Earth was colonised by slaves of a galactic overlord? Oh wait...

He's right of course. Two consenting adults should not be allowed to marry if they happen to be of the same sex, but an adult with a child is perfectly fine. In case of it being an older man marying a young girl (which I daresay will be mostly the case), labia and clit are to be removed first of course -otherwise she may consider cheating with boys her own age.

The doublethink that oppressive theocracies can cook up are just mindboggling.

Aisha, yes. Her age at the consummation of the marriage is not entirely certain, but is generally put below 12, but after her first period.

I do however seem to recall it was a marriage to keep her away from her abusive parents who wanted to sell her into slavery or something like that, and that he was obligated to consummate the marriage to not have it annulled by law (and hence seeing her return to a life of certain misery and so on).

Unfortunately it seems some muslims do not interpret this as "sometimes one has to do a lesser evil to prevent a greater one" but as "fucking kids is fine cause the prophet did it".

And on the other side of that of course, many people like to interpret it as "Doze Ebil Mozlemz lik 2 f0ck yor kiddees" while ignoring the context of human lifespan in that period or the explanation you just mentioned there. But Saudi Arabia is still an ass-backwards regime no better than the Taliban that only gets a free pass because it's sitting on both oil and Mecca; this is just the kind of crap you can expect from it until it somehow changes for the better.

Oh, and in before Ebil Mozlems.

I think that Principles 6, 7 and 9 of the Declaration of the Rights of the Child apply, as well as Articles 9, 12, 19, 29, 31, 34, 36, 37, of the Convention on the Rights of the Child.
Since Saudi Arabia, iirc, is a Party of both... mr.Saudi Cleric has got to shut up.

I think that Principles 6, 7 and 9 of the Declaration of the Rights of the Child apply, as well as Articles 9, 12, 19, 29, 31, 34, 36, 37, of the Convention on the Rights of the Child.

Bringing out the big guns, huh? Now they've done it, they don't want to be found having violated the Convention and the Declaration on the Rights of the Child, the consequences of that simply do not bear thinking about. I predict you'll see a 360 degree turn in their behavior.

Fuck Saudi Arabia -_-

Who gives a shit about Saudi Arabia. They shouldn't even be allowed to have their own country.

I don't really mean that, but they DO need to be deposed.

Dosen't matter. What do you think happend to that one guy from Whitest Kids U'Know?

i will make them feel even more safe by avoid rallies and any other public appearances by our commander and chief.

Wow, just...wow. This is some crazy shit here.

To be fair, interpreting religious tenets and supposedly moral examples for ones own twisted ends aren't something exclusive to any one culture or religion. Twisted people exist everywhere, and religion is a good vehicle for legitimizing deviant behavior if you can get yourself declared an authority on it.

True. I wonder how many priests, imams and so on "felt called into the priesthood" because of reasons like this. Subconciously maybe,but still.

And I just realised I neglected to mention the young girls teddybear in the relationship. She'd better not call it Mohammed, because then her hubby might be forced to be mean to her ;)

This is the same guy who said,

“A Muslim must understand his religion. It is the duty of the young and the whole Muslim world to know that violence is not a way to achieve reform"

“Young Muslims must try and better themselves and their country but not through violence"

and one I particularly liked,

"And if fighting an evil leads to a greater one, then that fight is forbidden."


Anyway, we can all cluck-cluck about how immoral this obviously makes Saudi Arabia/Arabs/Muslims, but the US has NAMBLA. We have people right here on this forum arguing against "ageism" who also agree that hey, if a 10 year old wants to marry it is unfair to her to say no. I disagree, strongly, in all cases, but the point is this kind of thinking is not much an incrimination of anything but this kind of thinking.

In other news:

PUDUCHERRY: In a bizarre ritual, two minor girls, both seven, from the remote Pallipudupet village in Tamil Nadu's Villupuram district were married
off to frogs on Friday night. The ceremony, an annual feature during the Pongal (harvest) festival, is conducted "to prevent the outbreak of mysterious diseases in the village''.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Two_minor_girls_married_off_to_frogs_in_Tamil_Nadu/rssarticleshow/3994895.cms

In other news:

PUDUCHERRY: In a bizarre ritual, two minor girls, both seven, from the remote Pallipudupet village in Tamil Nadu's Villupuram district were married
off to frogs on Friday night. The ceremony, an annual feature during the Pongal (harvest) festival, is conducted "to prevent the outbreak of mysterious diseases in the village''.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Two_minor_girls_married_off_to_frogs_in_Tamil_Nadu/rssarticleshow/3994895.cms

And of course, nobody will seriously scream that Hinduism is a barbaric, backwards religion. Unless these people turn out to be Indian Muslims in which case the screamings will commence.

And of course, nobody will seriously scream that Hinduism is a barbaric, backwards religion. Unless these people turn out to be Indian Muslims in which case the screamings will commence.

Well, there is this:

However, unlike the fairy tale `Frog Prince', where the ugly toad turns into a handsome prince when the princess kisses it, the Villupuram village belles bid their amphibian grooms goodbye and lead a normal life thereafter. As for the terrified frogs, they are thrown back into the temple ponds after the ceremony.

While the cleric from the OP probably expects actual consummation of the marriage, as well as genital mutilation and a taking away of offensively named teddybears ;)

And of course, nobody will seriously scream that Hinduism is a barbaric, backwards religion.

Are you serious?

Are you serious?

When was the last time you heard an outcry in the West over Hinduism? Even counting in the obligatory caste system gripes, it can't even begin to come close to the Ebil Mozlem Industry.

When was the last time you heard an outcry in the West over Hinduism? Even counting in the obligatory caste system gripes, it can't even begin to come close to the Ebil Mozlem Industry.

Maybe it's because Hindus haven't divided the world into "Here Be Hindus" and "Here Be Fucking Infidels Who Deserve To Fucking Die".

You know, like Islam did with "Dar al-Islam" and "Dar al-Harb".

Maybe it's because Hindus haven't divided the world into "Here Be Hindus" and "Here Be Fucking Infidels Who Deserve To Fucking Die".

You know, like Islam did with "Dar al-Islam" and "Dar al-Harb".

I forgot Hindus are absolutely peace-loving people who wouldn't harm so much as a gnat.

What is behind Hindu-Christian violence (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7214053.stm)

India Christians Injured As Hindu Violence Rocks State (http://www.worthynews.com/814-india-christians-injured-as-hindu-violence-rocks-state)

Hindu-Muslim Violence Imperils India (http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,213670,00.html)

Oh that's right, you're subscribing to the Potato Boy Theory: It's okay if it's not organized.

And you still owe Jim Carrey royalties.

When was the last time you heard an outcry in the West over Hinduism? Even counting in the obligatory caste system gripes, it can't even begin to come close to the Ebil Mozlem Industry.

Over the course of my life, I must have heard the story of where the word 'thug' comes from at least a million times. I also must have heard about the caste system and other such backwardness a million times too.

The hindus don't get a free pass, not at all. They just don't have so many demonstrations so they get people's backs up less. People still think it's barbaric and backwards. They just don't feel the need to point it out as often.

And now I remember.

There was someshit over a holy calf a few years back when the government decided to shoot it.

That was pretty funny.

Bringing out the big guns, huh? Now they've done it, they don't want to be found having violated the Convention and the Declaration on the Rights of the Child, the consequences of that simply do not bear thinking about. I predict you'll see a 360 degree turn in their behavior.

In the behaviour of the equivalent of right-wing nutjob clerics? No, I don't think they'll change. (And it would be a 180° turn to change direction, not 360°, buddy!)

The Saudi monarchy, though, will be keen NOT to officially condone that (because they're too smart to play badass muslim in front of the UN... they have to let Iran remain in the sights)... as much as they will be keen NOT to officially condemn such statements (because they're too smart to play teh ebil lapdog of the West).

And now I remember.

There was someshit over a holy calf a few years back when the government decided to shoot it.

That was pretty funny.

Bovine Tuberculosis is no laughing matter. We respected their religion by not also sterilising the entire temple with fire.

In the behaviour of the equivalent of right-wing nutjob clerics? No, I don't think they'll change. (And it would be a 180° turn to change direction, not 360°, buddy!)
You evidently missed the ... tags on that post. A "360 degree turn" is, precisely, what we can expect to see!

Over the course of my life, I must have heard the story of where the word 'thug' comes from at least a million times. I also must have heard about the caste system and other such backwardness a million times too.

"Thug" is a word that has lost all connections to its origin in the Western world, becoming a term for a generic hoodlum just as "Assassin" was watered down to mean any sort of killer, professional or otherwise. In fact "Thug" has a positive connotation in some cultural aspects and very few outside of scholarly circles use to mean a member of the Thuggee cult with the negative implications.

The hindus don't get a free pass, not at all. They just don't have so many demonstrations so they get people's backs up less. People still think it's barbaric and backwards. They just don't feel the need to point it out as often.

I'll believe that when Fundamentalist Christian figureheads like Pat Robertson and right wing pundits start declaring how evil Hinduism is and how its practitioners need to be converted or exterminated.

"Thug" is a word that has lost all connections to its origin in the Western world, becoming a term for a generic hoodlum just as "Assassin" was watered down to mean any sort of killer, professional or otherwise. In fact "Thug" has a positive connotation in some cultural aspects and very few outside of scholarly circles use to mean a member of the Thuggee cult with the negative implications.

That does not, however, change the fact that I have been told millions of times by people: "You know where the word 'thug' comes from, don't you? Them bloody Hindoos, they murder people you know! In the arse &c." And other assorted titbits of knowledge - how Indian toilets work, for example.

I'll believe that when Fundamentalist Christian figureheads like Pat Robertson and right wing pundits start declaring how evil Hinduism is and how its practitioners need to be converted or exterminated.

Well call in and ask. I am sure that is exactly what he will tell you. The only reason they don't do it on a daily basis is because Hindus have not been particularly newsworthy in recent years so I don't imagine they feel the need to comment so much. But I don't for a second imagine, while Pat feels that Muslims are all in sore need of forcible conversion, he thinks Hindus are just fine and have no need of baby jesus in their hearts. (Actually, I bet he has said something along those lines about the treatment of missionaries in India, but I can't be arsed to look for it).

And you are overlooking that for most of the two centuries Islam, especially by more moderate christians, was regarded as a more advanced belief system than Hinduism because it was just a sort of xtianity gone wrong (monotheist), whereas Hindus are no more than atavistic backward polytheists. And that's why we have pakistan today.

I'm sure when India finally pisses us off, they'll be back on the menu. Really, outside of the hippies at higher education centers who are, for some reason, entranced by eastern mysticism, nobody thinks it's a good idea. (Except for hindus themselves and people who took the movie ghandi too seriously).

Now if you'd said that mormons get off lightly I would have agreed with you.

Now if you'd said that mormons get off lightly I would have agreed with you.

They definitely did. Flagrantly violating Church and State with an overt contribution to Prop 8 and they still have Tax Exempt status? And of course there's those barbaric education camps that hasn't been cracked down on.

Hell, not even Warren Jeffs' Sexcellent Adventure did so much as raise any real anti-Mormon sentiments to a nationally visible degree.

They definitely did. Flagrantly violating Church and State with an overt contribution to Prop 8 and they still have Tax Exempt status? And of course there's those barbaric education camps that hasn't been cracked down on.

Hell, not even Warren Jeffs' Sexcellent Adventure did so much as raise any real anti-Mormon sentiments to a nationally visible degree.

Yeah. I don't get it either. At first I thought it was because they are white (usually) but then I remembered that people hate hippies, so that can't be all of the reason. (Probably part of it).

Whatever it is, it is like 'magic' though. I mean, mormons don't drink and they pester people all the time. Usually that leads to pariah status pretty quickly. Maybe it is because they talk about jesus. Who knows.

You evidently missed the ... tags on that post. A "360 degree turn" is, precisely, what we can expect to see!

Thank you. Saves me from having to point that out. I was wondering if people would catch that.

logically, one could make the same argument (as the op) AGAINST the existence of any such law as statutory! i.e. arcane and absurd.

of course expecting sexual activity of anyone who has yet to attain puberty is absurd also, buuuuut, i think a lot of people tend to forget how young their actual physical puberty occured. i know mine was between the ages of 10 and 11 and there was no one in my class at school when i was in the fifth grade who wasn't VERY interested in the subject!

i don't know what's typical in cities, but out in the boonies where i grew up, maybe its that good clean mountain air or something. maybe the polution in cities retards sexual development as much as it does mental, cause we sure didn't have that effect out there.

religeous fanatacism has no morally legitimate place in law, and none in anyone's bedroom either.

the on thing i'll aggree with the op to oppose is the emposition of any commitment, which is also an illogical thing: to hold anyone to a responsibility they did not voluntarily (with complete understanding) commit themselves to.

THAT at ANY age, under any belief. you know, while some are bussy bashing esotiric practices in, or at least not condemed by, islam, there are certainly no shortage of them under christerism. or rather the common street interpretations of it, pushed by tv preacher loonies.

all of which, in the case of most dominant beliefs, where they're dominant, tend more to be common misunderstandings then the actual teaching of their revealers.

(and i see absolutely nothing "wrong" with considering the age of 11 or 12 NO LONGER A CHILD!)

(though for sexual activity, pregnancy absolutely needs to be positively prevented before physical development is sufficint for safe childbirth. and by POSITIVELY prevented, i damd sure don't mean relying on 'abstinance' either!)

I'll believe that when Fundamentalist Christian figureheads like Pat Robertson and right wing pundits start declaring how evil Hinduism is and how its practitioners need to be converted or exterminated.
Ask and ye shall receive (http://www.sullivan-county.com/news/pat_quotes/hindus.htm).

When was the last time you heard an outcry in the West over Hinduism? Even counting in the obligatory caste system gripes, it can't even begin to come close to the Ebil Mozlem Industry.

True. And yet there are quite a few villages that have "child oracles" - kids that are placed in a palace, made to inhale fumes so they can "speak with the gods" and worshipped like they were gods themselves - until they hit puberty. Then they become unwanted outcasts.

Seems worthy of condemning to me.

This is my issue with religion, we can't stop child abuse because we're obliged to respect these people's cave-man like beliefs

It's bigotry to refer to their beliefs as "cave-man (http://img478.imageshack.us/img478/9014/cavemanflippingfingerao2.jpg) like"

Is this thread in support of the cleric? I didn't bother to read it - just assumed so.

It's not culture - it's institutionalized pedophilia.

It's not culture - it's institutionalized pedophilia.

Nothing the state can do can make these people desire the children if they didn't in the first place. The reverse is equally true.

By Trostia

This is the same guy who said,

“A Muslim must understand his religion. It is the duty of the young and the whole Muslim world to know that violence is not a way to achieve reform"

“Young Muslims must try and better themselves and their country but not through violence"

and one I particularly liked,

"And if fighting an evil leads to a greater one, then that fight is forbidden."

Well, just because one doesnt find one of his beleifs palatable doesn't mean one has to, by default, disagree with every beleif that comprises his worldview. I am merely appalled at his complicity towards child marriage and find it irresponsible that someone of his authority should hold that particular view on that specific issue.


Anyway, we can all cluck-cluck about how immoral this obviously makes Saudi Arabia/Arabs/Muslims, but the US has NAMBLA. We have people right here on this forum arguing against "ageism" who also agree that hey, if a 10 year old wants to marry it is unfair to her to say no. I disagree, strongly, in all cases, but the point is this kind of thinking is not much an incrimination of anything but this kind of thinking.

First, I am not American and I dont know why you are alluding to America. I hope you werent implying that I was attempting to vilify all Muslims or all national, ethnic groups that is associated with Islam. I may not be a practicing Muslim but I am from that culture and I find it distasteful whenever individuals with a modicum of relgious authority such as this cleric portray that culture in a negative light. I also find the concept of child-marriage absoloutely repulsive and feel that this issue merits some attention.

I keep thinking this thread is about a car called the Audi Cleric

Nothing the state can do can make these people desire the children if they didn't in the first place. The reverse is equally true. I mean, this particular perversion is tolerated by the state as religious practice. It's not "Fool around with kids or be beheaded," it's "Sure, you can molest children. The Koran says so!"