News1 min ago
Raising Minimum Age Of Marriage...
27 Answers
...to eighteen. New government proposal in order to "tackle" the problem of forced marriage.
How will this help solve that problem?
How will this help solve that problem?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by vetuste_ennemi. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Let me be very clear on this, FGM, breast ironing, forced marriages, circumcision ( for non medical reasons) etc etc etc have absolutely no place here, however a lot of supposedly Muslim customs are actually cultural rather than religious and it's difficult when people are not absolutely honest and transparent about why something is being said on a thread.
Most Africans do not practice FGM and breast ironing, most Muslims do not forcibly marry their daughters off at the crack of dawn on their 16th birthday, but the ones who DO need dealing with severely. Thankfully there was quite a sturdy sentence recently for the FGM case, and I'm hopeful that the authorities will take a dimmer view about forced marriage, but I don't think raising the age will help at all.
Most Africans do not practice FGM and breast ironing, most Muslims do not forcibly marry their daughters off at the crack of dawn on their 16th birthday, but the ones who DO need dealing with severely. Thankfully there was quite a sturdy sentence recently for the FGM case, and I'm hopeful that the authorities will take a dimmer view about forced marriage, but I don't think raising the age will help at all.
Religion and culture are independent of each other? Interesting.
"most Muslims do not forcibly marry their daughters off at the crack of dawn on their 16th birthday".
What proportion of Pakistani Muslims in Bradford are married to first cousins from their ancestral homeland?
There are no schools of Islamic jurisprudence which outlaw FGM, and some, like that practised in Somalia make it obligatory. Which is why the practice is now common in Bristol and other places with high numbers of Somalis. And why the practice by Muslims is not prosecuted with zeal. The "heavy sentence" and the UK's only (and probably last) conviction was imposed on a Ugandan witch.
"most Muslims do not forcibly marry their daughters off at the crack of dawn on their 16th birthday".
What proportion of Pakistani Muslims in Bradford are married to first cousins from their ancestral homeland?
There are no schools of Islamic jurisprudence which outlaw FGM, and some, like that practised in Somalia make it obligatory. Which is why the practice is now common in Bristol and other places with high numbers of Somalis. And why the practice by Muslims is not prosecuted with zeal. The "heavy sentence" and the UK's only (and probably last) conviction was imposed on a Ugandan witch.
In Bradford it's roughly 50%, but falling ( it was 70% back in the day), and the falling part of that is important. Cultural norms cannot be changed easily overnight, but we need to wherever possible, prosecute with zeal, regardless of religion, ethnicity yadyadayada. You seem to think I'm an apologist, I am anything but. In fact I'm a fan of the harshest possible consequences for people who do transgress in these areas, but the quickest way to change things within any community is from the inside out, and thankfully there are a lot of Muslims educating, informing and working tireless on the subjects of cousins marriage, forced marriage etc, so my objection to some threads like this is that it tars an entire community and religion with one huge brush when that is not the case.
//my objection to some threads like this is that it tars an entire community and religion with one huge brush when that is not the case//
This is a tedious misrepresentation, Calico Girl, for which I excuse you only in as far as conflating criticism of Islam with an an attack on all Muslims is the socially approved and lazy way of preventing honest analysis of Islam as an ideology.
Nobody, repeat, NOBODY says: "All Muslims are..." blah blah blah.
Lots of us, however, say that Islam as an ideology shares the supremacism of the 20th century European fascisms, cast not on racial or class divisions, but on religious ones. Which is why so many of its stricter adherents see no harm, but even a pious duty in enslaving, or killing those who "cause mischief in the land" by rejecting the message of Allah and His Messenger (i.e. the equivalents of "inferior races" or "class enemies").
If you reflect on a core principle of Jesus' teaching -"forgive your enemy and bless those who persecute you" -you will notice an obvious discordance between that principle and how Christian nations have often behaved.
Now take a core principle from Islam: that "Muslims are harsh to unbelievers, but merciful among themselves". Or a further one that Muslims are enjoined to love those things that Allah loves, but to hate those things He hates.
Compare these two principles: the counter-intuitive Christian one, and the obviouysly tribal Islamic one. You can see how difficult it would be a for a bad Christian (if forced against a wall) to justify his behaviour in religious term (i.e. what Jesus said and did, and what the New Testament teaches), can't you? But how easily, comparatively, a bad Muslim could justify his behaviour in religious terms (i.e. what Mohammed said and did, and what the Koran teaches).
This is a tedious misrepresentation, Calico Girl, for which I excuse you only in as far as conflating criticism of Islam with an an attack on all Muslims is the socially approved and lazy way of preventing honest analysis of Islam as an ideology.
Nobody, repeat, NOBODY says: "All Muslims are..." blah blah blah.
Lots of us, however, say that Islam as an ideology shares the supremacism of the 20th century European fascisms, cast not on racial or class divisions, but on religious ones. Which is why so many of its stricter adherents see no harm, but even a pious duty in enslaving, or killing those who "cause mischief in the land" by rejecting the message of Allah and His Messenger (i.e. the equivalents of "inferior races" or "class enemies").
If you reflect on a core principle of Jesus' teaching -"forgive your enemy and bless those who persecute you" -you will notice an obvious discordance between that principle and how Christian nations have often behaved.
Now take a core principle from Islam: that "Muslims are harsh to unbelievers, but merciful among themselves". Or a further one that Muslims are enjoined to love those things that Allah loves, but to hate those things He hates.
Compare these two principles: the counter-intuitive Christian one, and the obviouysly tribal Islamic one. You can see how difficult it would be a for a bad Christian (if forced against a wall) to justify his behaviour in religious term (i.e. what Jesus said and did, and what the New Testament teaches), can't you? But how easily, comparatively, a bad Muslim could justify his behaviour in religious terms (i.e. what Mohammed said and did, and what the Koran teaches).
There’s a very obvious flaw in this proposal in that very many Muslim marriages in this country are conducted in Islamic ceremonies in private homes and are not recognised in British law. Regardless of legislation, therefore, forced marriages, including those that bind young girls to grown men, will continue.
To argue that abominable practices such as FGM are cultural rather than religious denies reality. Islamic literature speaks favourably of FGM and, therefore, a case for its ‘religious’ observance is ably supported. Like other arguments that, although well-intentioned, unwittingly support uncivilised practices, whilst disregarding or denying that may be, within the rosy world of the liberal champions, expected and applauded, it is, in effect, not merely counter-productive, but facilitative.
To argue that abominable practices such as FGM are cultural rather than religious denies reality. Islamic literature speaks favourably of FGM and, therefore, a case for its ‘religious’ observance is ably supported. Like other arguments that, although well-intentioned, unwittingly support uncivilised practices, whilst disregarding or denying that may be, within the rosy world of the liberal champions, expected and applauded, it is, in effect, not merely counter-productive, but facilitative.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.