ANKARA - A parliamentary committe initiates a study on early marriages in Turkey. "Thirty percent of marriages take place in the age group of 12-19s" says the head of the committee, who claims this is a reality in Turkey. The study is a first despite numerous research on women.

A subcommittee formed of five parliamentarians will talk with officials from the Education, Health, Justice and Interior ministries as well as officials from the Religious Affairs Directorate. The members of the committee will then go to seven regions to make observations in the field. The committee will prepare a report describing the problem and offering solutions.

Recalling that 30 percent of marriages in Turkey are in the 12- to 19-year-old age group, Öznur Çalýk, president of the committee, told the Anatolian News Agency that marriages at an early age is a reality in Turkey and that there is a general consensus in society on this issue. "In order to ensure the well being of individuals and society, we need to proceed without provoking this consensus and avoid creating unease," Malatya deputy Çalýk said. "We need to share this problem with the society in an evolutional transformation."

There is a need to understand why marriages are taking place at such early ages and the moral and material reasons behind them, said Çalýk from the ruling Justice and Development Party, or AKP. "We need to see the serious complications that come out of these marriages, physical problems that lead to difficulties later in life."According to Çalýk, one of the arguments against early marriages is health problems, both physical and psychological. "Marriage at an early age brings with it birthing at a young age. We need to especially focus on complications suffered by young girls."

Another serious consequence of early marriage is the high death toll among those who give birth at an early age, according to Çalýk. "The rate of death toll among young mothers is higher. We need to explain clearly this situation to society. Early marriage is a violation of human rights, women’s rights and children’s rights. We put heavy responsibility on the shoulders of children who are still at playing age. We need to see that we also don’t take away their right to an education."

Recalling that marriages of those below 17 are not considered "official" according to civil law, Çalýk said it is difficult to detect unofficial early marriages.According to unofficial research, 80 percent of marriages at an early age are by girls. According to Çalýk, there is a general view in the society that education can solve the problem and support from local administrators, muftis, teachers and parents is required.

"We need to have a higher participation in education. The campaigns for more girls in school are very effective. We need to have the local opinion leaders, teachers and religious officials informing the public about the risks of early marriage."

More

*********

Marrying at 12? Giving birth at 13? OMG!!!

"Thirty percent of marriages take place in the age group of 12-19s" says the head of the committee, who claims this is a reality in Turkey. The study is a first despite numerous research on women."

Just my two cents worth - I would roll over dead before I let either of my children get married in this age group!!  I don´t think there is any need to get married before 25! 

12? :O That´s waaaaaaay too early!

Lis, I am not going to let my little one marry until he´s at least 40 And I´m going to be a really awful potential mother-in-law to keep those bed girls away

 lol we will have to talk with you again then when he is 18 or something inþallah and see what would you think about it  lolllll

From what i hear one ´ parents´ would match make too if s/he can lol

Seriously, i believe anytime after 21 would be acceptable before that should be denied.

Ým not just talking about customs or traditions but also about 2 people falling in love and want to get marry.

Before 21 its ridiculous, with pressure like off Mammy, daddy but i love him/her...21 would be allowed, but still

They would have all the time in the world so why the rush ?!

27 is more than fine..

Both are mature, have experience, know exactly what they want.

 In all meanings?

 Ãf i got you correctly, then...no

Not in all meanings, somethings kept for later...in our religion, customs and traditions at least

 Dammit DD!!!   I thought we were going to see the first TC arranged marriage between your terrorist and Lis´s princess but if you are going to make him wait until he is 40.............poor girl can´t be expected to wait that long!!!

Well, I´d PMd her offering a reasonable dowry but she replied that she wouldn´t give me an answer before she considers other offers Apparently she believes she may come across something better than my generous promise to get her FF´s secret soup recipe

I agree with Canli about 21 being a suitable age to marry in the letter of the law and 27 being the real age people should start considering marriage

 Well, I hope you don´t mind that I (and many others) tried if the shoes fit before buying them?

Do not be lured into single way missionary traps.

Percentage of unmarried but  pregnant 14 year old girls on the streets of USA Canada is very likely to exceed the percentage of Turkish girls married around the same age.(Most of those not pregnant yet are definitely hard at work, experimenting with the idea, anyway)

In Western cultures, it is bad if elders in a society opt to marry a girl at younger ages, usually in dignity and  sometimes out of forcing social necessities....What is encouraged in the West are modern ideas like  "sex out of marriage is no loss of honor for unmarried girls", "virginity is an old and obsolete concept, who needs it ? " or  "homosexuality is ok, if it is one´s own choice".

 You have a bit of a point there Alpha, I don´t agree with marriage under the age of consent and I find aspects of the article disgusting.

But we do not condem young girls of 12 and 13 etc, losing their virginity to very often older teenagers and young adults, males, ending up in pregnancy.  It is nearly an accepted fact that young girls (and boys) will start to experiment earlier and earlier.   If the girl has not properly consented or does not realise what she is getting into, is this not so different from girls being married off at such a young age?

Either way, it is wrong but society allows it to happen and until society changes it views then it will carry on.

 In a year since i*ve been gone, not much has changed i see! Alpha you still are unable to rein your over-generalizations about Western culture and ideology in an attempt to portray all that is Turkish as justifiable, reasonable and rational! i*ve been here in Turkey for two years and i hardly find a western girl choosing to lose her virginity comparable to a poor, young eastern turkish girl being married. Yes, maybe she says yes but what would happen if she were to say no? have you read the newspaper in the last two weeks? what has happened to the young lady who recently said no to marrying a young man? and what happened to the young girl who went to visit a dj friend? Lose morals for you but freedom of choice even to make the WRONG choice is far more preferable!

I think you misunderstand western thinking.  Sex before marriage and homosexuality are not "encouraged" as such. What is encouraged is simply a MUCH greater emphasis on the rights of the individual.

What is frowned on in the West is any religious or social group attempting to dictate how members of society must behave morally. (The exception is criminal behaviour, but only the government has authority to take action in the area). This is because what one group might consider to be "standards of moral behaviour" is regarded as "unacceptable religious repression" to another.

At the core of western thought is the belief that a person has the right to choose their own actions (so long as they do not interfere with the wellbeing of another). The parallel of this is that no-one has the right to enforce standards of behaviour on another against their will.

For women to choose to preserve their virginity prior to marriage is absolutely their right and of course many women do this. But for a woman to be denied that choice is considered a violation of her human rights.

Likewise homosexuality between consenting adults is deemed acceptable - not because we champion homosexuality but because of the principle that no-one has the right to dictate otherwise.

So it all comes down to basic perception. If you believe that an individual should behave in accordance with strict societal rules the you will see Western thinking as being completely "immoral".

If you believe that the rights of the individual are the most important thing, then you will regard concepts such as "sex before marriage is dishonourable" as being nothing more than religious repression.

Virgins of the world, unite !

All you have to lose is your virginity !

Paris Hilton (or was it Hugh Heffner?)

 ....and how about undies.....?  Sometimes I see used underpants for sale in flea markets, I never could imagine who might buy them, but I guess some do.

Here it´s against the law to try on intimate apparel.  If you purchase anything of that sort, you can not return it....even if you claim you did not wear it.

 Welcome back, Aenigma!

Really?

Always lovely to see you here canim! Thank god you haven´t changed either, as always eloquent and reasonable! 

 I thought it, but I can be very wrong....

I am so glad people here liked the term "Western Culture".  I had just made it it up ! )))))))))))))))))))

 I´d prefer Vulture Culture.

Trudy

Um, I´m not sure what/who you mean. My name is Manning (my real first name) and I only found this site last week.

I think you´ll find the term "Western Culture" has been in regular use for many, many years.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Western_culture

Thank you Manning, it appears that AlphaF needs some enlightement in this matter.

There was a user here with nickname Aenigma, who left the site many times and would usually come back at first in an ´undercover´ way -- trying not to show who she was. So some of our older members find themselves suspicious of new members.

Welcome to the site!

Thanks Catwoman

As far as the Aenigma thing - fair enough, such confusion happens. 

Just for reference, I´m a "he" not a "she", and I live in Sydney. My (extremely lovely) girlfriend is Turkish and works at the Turkish Consulate here -  hence I am starting to learn Turkish  - hence I stumbled upon on this site.

No fooling you Manning. You are smart !

At last we agree on something.

Manning, welcome tot he site. I agree with everything you said about western culture being more about individualism and ability to make one´s choices. Even if sometimes people´s choices result in pregnancies, it still sounds better to me than being chosen a groom and forced to have sex with him. The peer pressure encouraging teens to have sex doesn´t make everyone have sex at the age of 12. Actually most of my friends lost their virginity in secondary school, so at about 17.

As for sex before marriage, everyone´s free to decide whether or not to have it. Why should I mind people who want to stay virgin until they get married? I´m perfectly ok with it. But I won´t have people telling me what to do. I´d never marry before having sex just because I don´t believe it´s something "sacred". My feeling is - if you are with someone you like and if you feel like doing it then why not? Yet, I´m still far from imposing my point of view on others. It´s like food - some people like kokoreç so let tem eat it, nobody will ever convince me that sheep´s intestines are tasty.

With the exception of the simplest and natural ones, free-choice exists only for the mighty and the rich.

Furthermore, being able to make choices does not automatically bring forth freedom for the masses. On the contrary, people of similar choices tend to stand together and restrict the choices of those who are in minority. Norms follow suit in such communities paving the path for more restrictions for marginals.

Your choices define who you are which in return effectively limits options available to you.A teenager girl condemns the government when she is denied entry to university because she wears hejab. In her neighborhood on the other hand, many a young girl in revealing clothes finds it difficult to walk by without being harassed or molested. Just like the personal freedoms of black or middle-eastern people are at stake when they are in the wrong neighborhood (and vice versa).

Consequently, unless there is a moral basis that governs the extent of freedoms, there is no freedom at all.

 This phrase came to mind while reading this thread....

"Freedom is just another word for nothing left to loose"

We are all slaves to our biological existance.  Without ingestion, absorbtion and excretion we die. 

After that we are slaves to our desires.   Our desires are limited by our means.  

The mighty and rich are not free either, as they are more easily enslaved by their power and the fear of the loss of it.....they have less to constrain their desires...which in turn enslaves them.

Of course only the insane are trully free, unless we argue that it´s their insanity that limits them. All others exist within material, social, intellectual or religious boundaries. We were not generalising here about there being absolute freedom in the world. What was at issue here was how personal freedoms are realised in the west, or to be more precise, the liberty of becoming sexually active.

The notion of moral basis is an obscure one, if we look at the middle east we see how the government´s or monarch´s morality is reflected in the society. The result is mostly unacceptable for a westerner, especially a female westerner. This leads me to believe that indeed, western society is freer, ie grants more individual freedom as far as personal decisions are concerned.

There´s a quote from M. Atwood´s Handmaid´s Tale

"There are two kinds of freedom: freedom to and freedom from"

The society depicted by Atwood is a society free from rape, violence, poverty but at he same time it´s a terrifying place where women are not free to make their own decisions or live their life as they´d like.

Are you serious?

.....from your link....

"From its very beginnings in Mesopotamia and Ancient Greece the East-West distinction has been somewhat difficult to define with precision."

Beginnings in Mesopotamia ????

Mesopotamia (Arabic: بلاد الرافدين transliterated: Bilad Al-Rafidayn, Greek exonym: Μεσοποταμία, "land between the rivers")[1] is a toponym for the area of the Tigris-Euphrates river system, along the Tigris and Euphrates rivers, largely corresponding to Iraq,[2] as well as some parts of northeastern Syria,[2] some parts of southeastern Turkey,[2] and some parts of the Khūzestān Province of southwestern Iran.

From your link "This article may contain original research or unverified claims. Please improve the article by adding references. See the talk page for details. (May 2009)
 This article is in need of attention from an expert on the subject "

I do think there is a "Western Culture", but it didn´t start in Mesopotamia....that link was a rather biased article....as was inferred on the page containing it....

perhaps you should find your own roots.

Sexual freedom being a hallmark of the Westen culture? That is probably only true for the last few decades and not more. Sexuality was not invented in the recent centuries. Instead, it existed since the first humans and the freedoms pertaining to it have been lived in different ways. There were periods marked by what we may call today as a complete freedom for sexual perversion of all kinds. Then again this is just a point of view valid only today. If you look into the history of the West, you´ll notice there is a deliberate aversion from sex. In some sects, monks are not allowed to get married and the mere thought of sex is considered a sin for a nun. Only a little while ago in the 50´s, marriages were a lot more old fashioned with thick lines for what women are supposed to do were very much in place. Inquisition courts and witch hunts are the historical proofs I could put forward.

The rise of individualism had its roots elsewhere and mainly in the East (see India). Sexual revolution in Scandinavia began along with the drug craze which again had its roots in Asia. It was a huge protest the like of which has never been seen in history. It being a protest was so obvious, the movement wanted to essentially change whatever there is in the West that restrains people´s lives comprehensively.

The Asian cultures have traditionally been a lot less reserved about sex. I find the Western notion of sex to be a lot more brutal and shallow which is manifested in the works of the porn indistry which I believe serves the needs of an average Western person. Everywhere female flesh is on display. Magazines and newspapers are full of news suggestive of sexuality in the meanest sense. Your media cannot get around its obsession with the likes of Paris Hilton.

When we travel back in time a couple of centuries, we end up with a complete change of values pertaining to sex. In Asiatic and Hellenic cultures homosexuality was regarded quite normal. There were whole periods praising homosexuality as a choice quite openly and without any shame or restraints. A Turkish ruler in India named Babur Shah writes about his love for a young male. He goes into such details as how he his face would be blushed and that he would  be tongue-tied when he saw his (male) lover. From what he wrote we know that most of his contemporaries had both wives and male lovers.

What you wrote could be true for these few decades but they lack depth and thus credibility.

Alameda

I think you have misunderstood my point.

AlphaF claimed to have "invented" the term "Western Culture".

I was merely pointing out that this term has been in use for many many years and was certainly NOT invented on this forum.

I completely agree that there is plenty of dispute about what the term "Western culture" actually means. 

I contend it much of the time in "Western" culture it´s  about the self as in selfish, rather than something high minded, and also I think it´s the result of manipulation. Try looking at:

"Century of the Self"

"Bernays was convinced that this was more than just a way of selling consumer goods. It was a new political idea of how to control the masses. By satisfying the inner irrational desires that his uncle had identified, people could be made happy and thus docile."

It documents the beginning of the all-consuming self glorification, which has come to dominate today´s world.

all four videos can be seen here

If you are ever in a disaster you will see how far you get by yourself.    In a  community more strength is found than by being an "individual".  In order to accommodate others,  concessions are required.  Collectivism requires a degree of altruism.

We are getting so individual that there is very little family left. It used to be that the family was a stronghold.  By family I don´t just mean a small nuclear family, but the large extended family that one sees in the "East" more.  How many "Westerners" know cousins or who their second, third, forth or fifth cousins are?  How many actually have any type of relationship with them?

Society starts with the family, how we get along with our family largly determines how we get along with the rest of civilization.  What I see in the "Western" civilization is to me truly tragic.  As I´ve mentioned before, I´ve visited many elderly who are alone, while their famlies are off some other place taking care of their "individual" needs.

We are becoming even more segregated with "Senior Communities" where the young are deprived of the experience and wisdom of their elders, and the elders wither away unwanted, unappreciated. All that life experience wasted.....and what a shock it will be to the youth when they get to that same end....as they will....all they have to do is live long enough.

Drifting aimlessly from one sexual encounter to the next and the next and again the next and on ad infinititum, does little to build lasting meaningful quality relationships.  It really is little more than communal masturbation, in my opinion.  One may feel liberated and "free" but are they? 

Some things are precious and fragil treasures.  To me they are sacred.

We need to find a balance between out of control "individualism" and "collectivism".  United we stand....divide and conquer.....

??? young teenage turks are actually mature at that age compared to teenagers here in the US.... It doesn´t surprise me why they would marry so young.

  Being a teacher here in Turkey, i couldn*t disagree with you more! Most of my thirty year olds act as children! To be fair a teen is a teen however, some are forced to NOT act their age. But their maturity and mentality are pretty universal. Of course this doesn*t apply to teens dealing with extreme conditions. However, even those ones are still just teenagers being forced to grow up quickly.

Vineyards, I never said in my former post that sexuality was inveted in the west or that the way it functions nowadays has been the same for ages. As I´m sure you´re able to observe, culture and society within it evolve so things change. I´m happy that the change is for better. A few decades ago a single woman would be called a spinster as women were expected to marry. Fortunately that changed and so did people´s attitude to sex. That´s why women who decide to have sex are no longer stoned as they are in the easter culture that you admire so much or put into convents like it used to be. Also forced marriages are a thing of the past. Sex never had too much meaning attached to it, it was merely about procreation and gene mixing before Christianity took over. It was common in Slavonic culture to offer wanderers crossing a village a woman so that genes are exchanged. Nobody demanded virginity and nobody was making taboo of it. With Christianitythat changed, people started being embarrassed about something as natural as sex. These days it´s regaining its balance and I find it a good thing. You don´t have to do what you don´t want to so that´s fair enough by me. The eastern cultures you mention

Sexual freedom does not result in perversion, that´s an oversimplification. Law is clear about what is and what is not legal. Of course there are people breaking the law but when they´re caught, they get punished. Following your feeble reasoning, shopping centers cause shoplifting.

Moreover, sexual freedom is NOT a hallmark of western culture, it is actually a tiny part of everyday life. Our right to follow our needs as far as the law allows us, nothing more nothing less.

As for the porn industry, I believe Turkish newspapers are actually more revealing than western ones (I´m not talking here about pornographic press but tabloids or daily newspapers). Still, western men seem to respect women more than those in the east. Any person can watch a porn, read an x-rated magazine or even make their own tape and put it on the Internet if they feel like it. Yet, verbal abuse of women in the streets is scarce - they know that any woman can press charges so if they feel like letting off some steam, they do it in the privacy of their homes or special institutions . I have never travelled far east, but Turkish attitude was enough for me. Men following me, openly saying sexist things and not wanting to beat it unless I shouted at them - those are not things I´m likely to experience home. And I was not wearing very revealing clothes when I was on my own, so what you´re saying about sexual ease being grounds for perversion is not true, it is actually the culture surpressing natural needs that provokes it.

Homosexuality is another issue, it´s ridiculous when countries like Iran state that there are no homosexuals in them. Sure...the fact that you say you don´t see an elephant in the middle of the room doesn´t mean it´s not there. You may dislike homosexual people, you may be 100% straight, but condemning adult people for what they do at each other´s consent is illogical.

I find it surprising you are closer to accept the imposed eastern submissiveness of women, death penalties for having sex, forced marriages, polygamy and abuse within marriage than the culture that allows adult people make their own decisions

1   Yes, in fact the Christian ideal is celibacy, and if one is going to indulge in sex, it was only for reproduction,  and only certain positions were allowed. I think what we see in "Western" culture now is a reaction to that. You know,  like when a kid gets in the candy store, often times they overindulge and make bad choices. I think eventually it will even out.  Now it´s like drug addicts looking for a stronger fix or something new that will satisfy. Additionaly,  I think the constant talking about it comes from the tradition in the church of confession and absolution. The East has no such a tradition.

2    Many draw the conclusion that it was actually the invention of penicillin, birth control pills that let loose the sexual revolution,  in conjunction with questioning of traditional Christian religious teachings.

3   The lust for new adventure as expressed in pornography is a symptom of an inability to be satisfied. Jewish, Islamic and Eastern cultures have traditionaly had a much more realistic and humane attitude towards sex, in as much as it was never seen as  just as a method to reproduce, but a means of comfort and emotional bonding as well.  Celibacy has no place in either Judaism and  Islam. 

my obnion the true age of marraige is 24 or 25

Alameda, I think you got it wrong. Celibacy is for priests only, not for common folks. Also it means "being unmarried" not "not having sex". At least not directly as what Christianity has been teaching is that sex is for married people only. And in this respect I believe it´s similar to Islam or Judaism. However, comparing countries with dominant Christianity, people disagreeing with the Churches will are not stonned to death or killed in order to save the family´s face. However, this is still, in 21th century, what happens in Islam dominant countries. Hence I have no idea how you can believe that Islam and Judaism grant sexual freedom as opposed to Christianity.

On theoretical grounds - all Big Three agree that sex if for married people. True, Islam may be more permitting here as it allows men have sex with more than one woman - now - is that a good thing?

In reality - in the past Christianity demanded that people have sex only for procreation. However, we all know hardly anyone listened to it. Literature from Reneissance on shows that people were actually having loads of out-of-weddlock sex, usually priests were no exception (I don´t think there´s an institution as biased and hypocritical as Roman Catholic Church). So, despite Church´s teachings people never really listened. What Alameda talks about - Confession and Absolution being the key words here. In Christianity you sin, then confess and are granted absolution. Who wouldn´t take that chance. Also it´s a way for priests to have sex despite celibacy

Nowadays we all know what´s it like - Christianity is a choice and the influence of Church calling for abstinence falls on deaf ears.

Do I really need to talk about present day Islam´s "loose" attitude to sex? Honour killings, stonings, polygamy...wait! So it´s actually exactly as it used to be in the past If you prefer to call such attitude to sex liberal than have fun (or not)

this message was posted before it was finished...read the next one.

I haven´t read all the posts in this thread, but just based on Alameda´s last post -- I cannot believe that an intelligent, educated person can defend polygamy in Islam (or not in Islam, doesn´t matter). It´s a primitive and ugly tradition/custom/way of life... It doesn´t matter why it´s there or what the origin of this kind of arrangement are, "the ideal state a human can aspire to" -- using your own words -- is faithfullness and loyalty between two people, if they want to call each other husband and wife (that is, if they want to give this cohabitation another name, like ´a man and his slaves´, or ´a man and his harem´, then that seems to do away with the hypocricy at least, and then god bless them). Luckily, the Western culture has evolved to recognize that having multiple wifes is simply wrong.

Comparing that to a man having his mistresses besides his marriage seems to me like a desparate way of looking for an excuse to islamic polygamy. I would feel stupid to even explain the reason why!!!

1  Let´s get real here....yes and a virgin really means unwed female...right. What was meant was no sex.

Celibacy in Christianity

The ideal woman in Christianity is the Blessed Perpetually Virgin Mary, giving rise to the Virgin Whore syndrome.

Of course marriage was allowed, there would be no humans if it weren´t.  If St Augustine has his way even that would not have been allowed.  Even though marriage was allowed, relations within marriage were strictly regulated.  Marriage for clergy was allowed after a great deal of conflict....The Protestant Reformation brought in more liberal views....but by that time there were already over 1500 years of anti-sex/marriage tradition embedded in society.  We could go into all the various branches of Christianity, but let it suffice to say the one of the most important elements to the attainment of the highest state a human could attain was obtainable only as a monastic celibate....and sex was for procreation, not fun.....

2  Muslims and Jews are allowed to enjoy sex.

3 ....and Western men only have sexual relations with one woman?  How many men in Western cultures have more than one women....with those women having no path to legitimacy.  The norm in Islam is one wife, but under some conditions,  and only if a man can afford it (in all ways), Islam allows for up to 4 wives.  Some of those conditions are, if a woman can not have children, is too ill to have relations...instead of abandoning her, he can ask for another wife.  He has to treat them all equal, provide separate living quarters for each one, spend equal time with each one. Each wife has legal rights.....unlike mistresses who are out in the cold if the man tires of her.

4   Yes dangling absolution in front of the eyes of people like a carrot has has brought in a lot of converts.....however....many,  do not buy it....Then most do not bother to read the fine print....absolution is only possible in the case of perfect contrition....not just fear of hell.

My point is;  the effects of 2000 years of sexual repression on the culture remain.

I really think you exaggerate things a great deal. Honor killings are remnants of pagan practices, stonings are rare, and happen only in the most backward places.  Few countries practice it. FYI the only way a legal case for adultery can be obtained is with, all but impossible evidance, or if one testifies against oneself.

Of course,  as you mentioned, much of the repression on sexuality was ignored.  Sexual freedom/exploitation was widely practiced by the upper class in parts of Europe. 

Point in fact, although it is thought the Victorian period was very prudish, at the same time many famous and influential courtesans all but ruled the day.  A woman could raise the status of her husband, with his full knowledge by making "liaisons" with well placed men....a well documented fact...isn´t there a famous princess  who bragged about her great grandmother.

Courtesans

You know, I find it amusing when some people who say sex is no big deal and jealousy is stupid, get so upset when thinking about strictly regulated Islamic polygamy.

You have your beiefs, and nobody is asking you, or suggesting you personaly accept such a situation. 

I did not say it is the ideal situation, or even a desirable one, but I am looking at it in a rational manner, not emotional, it is an option allowed for some situations.

The fact of the matter is, in Western societies,  more than a few women have had long term relationships with married men, even had children by them.  This is a fact.....and those women and children have little protection, they are even scorned.  Do you really think that is preferable?

You can shut your eyes, but it has been practiced for many years, and many of the Patriarchs had multiple wives.

David   

Soloman

Jacob

to name a few......

Then take a look at nature....and our closest relatives...the chimpanzee...gorilla....

Just because something has been practiced for many years does not make it right....stoning people to death has been practiced for many years too.  Should that be an accepted practice? 

As far as chimps and gorillas...humans have the capacity for complex thought processes.  They share similar genes and are intelligent creatures, no doubt, but they are not even close to being as evolved as the human when it comes to thinking, reasoning and questioning.

 All humans, GG?

i think you all wastin time for nothin....Before marriage you cant do sex...or anythin else...if you think so..pls have a look Quran... and HZ Lut and HZ Nuh (a.s) phophet Life...god gave them punishment coz of sex (gay ,Homosexual,young girl sex with hisdad ,old man ,etc)

   I belive in god...whtvr he said we should follow...otherwise no matter what  u guys say is nonsen about this topic....

I hate to disappoint you, but anyone (!) CAN have sex, married or not. That you don´t WANT to have it because of your (religious) beliefs, is something else. Like I don´t force you to have sex before you are married, you cannot force me (and others) not to have it. BTW I had sex before marriage, during my 12 year marriage and after my divorce and I can tell you it feels the same! 

People absolutely CAN have sex before marriage, it´s just that some religions say it is wrong to do so.  Yet, how many people have an arranged or forced marriage where sex is not even enjoyable for either of them, yet they are supposed to procreate? I think that if two people love each other, they shouldn´t have to be married in order to express that love physcially, but I don´t condemn anyone who doesn´t agree with me.

There are a lot of different versions of what God said - the Bible, Quran, Tora. Islam, Christianity, and Judaism all believe in the same God and all say that we should not have sex before marriage. Do you think all the people who don´t follow this advice will go to hell?

 Yes isLam is way of Life ...thts why i try to stay away from bad things...if not why we have religion?god create us fo what? you just do what you want to do what your feeling say...but i do what god ask me to do...tha s the reasong between us....look around around the world...sex is everywhere now...homosexualty...lesbian gay everywhere...but look at the past...Hz Lout Hz Nouh...their people also got punishment coz of what you sayin to me now...true is alwys hurt some1 but nobdy want to belive...

  http://www.hyahya.org/Quran_translation/Quran_translation71.php

 http://www.hyahya.org/Quran_translation/Quran_translation26.php

yes but pls people chngd the holly books bfre ..thts why god sent us Quran .. only god knows  where we will go...

 I don´t believe in (a) god, what now?

Alameda, sure Christianity advocates sex for married people only - so does Islam and Judaism. No different attitudes here, the only one being that in Catholicism priests cannot marry (but they can in other Christian denominations).

You say Christianity doesn´t allow pleasure, that´s partially true, of course in the past they were strict about it, nowadays nobody preaches that in church Still, they´re backward in their attitude to contraception. In Islam people can enjoy sex? Sure, especially when you´re forced to marry an old pervert at 12. Of course I agree that Islam encourages sexual pleasure for men, as it lets them have 3 wives. I don´t think there´s a religion more for men than Islam

European or, in general, western attitude to sex comes from giving up Christianity as moral authority. Those behaviours show that human being can function normally providing for their needs in a reasonable way without being terrorised with the notion of hell. I believe society is happier and more fulfilled once religion is back where it should be - in people´s hearts. This way those who want to follow Christian teachings are free to do it and those who don´t are not suffering from repercussions. Isn´t that ideal? You individually choose whther or not virginity is important to you and it´s only up to you if you marry to have sex or do it without it. I´m sure Islamic countries would be the same if religion wasn´t so dominant. For now it´s only the men who benefit from sex - especially with tourists . It is sad that a man who commits a sin having sex with before marriage demands his wife to be a virgin.I hope women will grow stronger in the east and fight male dominance. For now I can only feel sorry for them.

Although I am an atheist so far from advocating Christianity, I wonder why you see almost non-existent in public life religion as something that limits people and, at the same time, find one of the strongest religions, most limiting human rights (Islam) as right. Something doesn´t add up here...

If you believe your God will frown upon you if you have sex before marriage, then don´t do it - it is as simple as that. But don´t tell me what to do as for me your God is as real as Tooth Fairy so I don´t understand why I should follow his teachings...(and, speaking of God, I speak of all religions). There is law (and law should be based on inter-human relations, empathy, justice and freedom not ancient scrolls that outdated a long time ago) to obey. In some areas law and religion overlap which is understandable but law prevents only those acts whose effect is something more than "you´ll go to hell"

  then who created you?  u came out from yourmom ...who created yourmom? sun? moon?sea?or anythin else? you saying somethin that you belive ..but there is no prof ..but i Have...u just givin up from everythin coz of ursexual enjoymnt? thts why at many countries now   many young ladies got son or doughter but no dady...why?coz SEX...coz of a few mnute enjoyment...

Bebeq, great - if you don´t want to have sex before marriage, then don´t. We don´t have a problem with that

But not everybody believes in God so you can only speak for yourself. Others CAN and DO have sex

 Read more about Darwin and you know what I believe in.

 Like T-shirts: Good girls go to heaven, bad girls go everywhere. Guess what I like to be?

Bebeq, the discussion of creation is a lenghty one so I´ll skip it, some people believe in science, some in A Great Ball of Pasta, some in aliens, it doesn´t matter - everybody has their ideas and all the right to live according to it. Aliens putting people on earth makes as much sense as an imaginary god who creates human only to see them suffer...

And people do not give up god because they want to have sex, people give up god just like any other fairy tale. Single parents are a bad thing? I know a lot single parents who have very happy children. What about women forced to marry men, women raped every night in Islamic marriages? Is that a happy life? I´d rather be a single mum than be forced to marry a monster who thinks he´s better from me only because he´s got testicles

we´re going to have fun together

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-n3Mqvec7Dw watch this for yourbrain easy to understan who created you

 Nah, I know my mom and dad created me, with lots of fun!

 Surah 109. Al-Kafirun

In the name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful.

1. Say : O ye that reject Faith!

2. I worship not that which ye worship,

3. Nor will ye worship that which I worship.

4. And I will not worship that which ye have been wont to worship,

5. Nor will ye worship that which I worship.

6. To you be your Way, and to me mine

 Quran came out how many tousnd year bfre..alrdy said as wht u say... hope you will find the right way soon...

 I doubt this site is meant for evangelising.....

 this is urright wich u follow if you can mix water and oil together i ll follow whatvr you say,...

 Nope. It´s stated in the forum rules.

 im not fightin...not bein rude...not insult any1...just sayin myright...thts it..as u do

 Sure. But promoting a religion by posting surahs is something different to me.

 Since u promotin a man the name is call david or wtvr its ...i do respct...why when i got myright to show somethin here call promotin? yes somethin diffrn to u..coz u never open it and read wht its write comin here easy sayin everythin from yourmouth....dis is very diffrnt to me 2..  

   anywy...we are far away from topic SEX

 Eh?

 The topic is not sex, the topic is getting married between 12 and 19!

 mm of coz no good to marry wich u don wan...in turkey still have...in china and many other countries...what we can do.. fo me education very imprtnt about this..and economic ...and nowadays many girls also goin for $ forcing theirslf to get a rich man to marry what u think for this ms trudy?

Reading with interest.  Two questions bebeq, who is this ´David´ Trudy is promoting? and why are you promoting the Koran´s teachings if you are ´from Hell??´ 

 Read more about Darwin (sorry not david)

 sorry lady in red i don understnd what u mean by and why are you promoting the Koran´s teachings if you are ´from Hell?? explain clear pls and im not promotin anythin.....i m showin myproff...liqe she showin

I don´t promote Darwin. You asked me where I came from and I answered.

Your Profile Information says:  Location: From Hell

you asked me to read then i show you to read why u need to say i promotin? pls PROFF ms trudy... im asking simple question u cant even answer....u not belive anythin u r ateist oke...i understnd...since u belive tht there is no god...then u create a human?forget about it...can u mix water and oil together answer me this...ms beautiful trudy

 Sorry, but in this type of religious discussion I´m not interested.

First of all, I did not say that you cannot have your belief system. We are just sharing opinions here.

Second of all, people do have feelings that need to be taken into account, even in cold analyses. I am simply saying that polygamy is a primitive way of life, that from a humanitarian point of view is a disaster.

I again find it rather odd and weird for a certainly intelligent person to make a comparison between polygamy and extramarrital affairs. You are basically saying that "since people do sometimes kill each other, why don´t we just let them to just go out on the streets and get it done and over with in a legal way". How can you even make such a comparison? It does seem to be a desparate search for justification of islamic ways.

 True, we should have been much more sensitive about our citizens especially about those in the Eastern provinces. However, there is a catch here which you yourself recently brought up unconsciously: they are unbelievably resistant to any attempt to change them. They hold on to their cultural life style regardless of where they are.  For many years, these people have been encouraged by powers that be who provided them finances and weapons. Truth be told, no one wants to live with these people as long as they remain the way they are. This includes you too. Many of those whom you criticized in one of your recent messages were Kurds. They get married at 12 usually a member of their extended families. Kurdish women are absolutely bereaved of any social rights. They usually fall victim to honor killings.

As is known, there is a feudal culture in the Eastern parts of Turkey where the population is composed mainly of Kurds. Feuds, tribal conflicts, religious bigotry are quite rampant there. In other words, there are two Turkeys in Turkey one that is conflict with the other. You also know there is a guerilla war  in the mountains of these regions. Those terrorists are targeting any attempt to extend or improve infrastructure in the region. This further complicates efforts to alleviate the problem. Teachers have usually been targeted. Only the bravest and the most self-sacrificing ones accept working in the terror affected regions without minding their lives. They have difficulty travelling back to their hometowns since the PKK occassionaly stops coaches making id check ups and executing any civil servants.

I can´t defend our governments have historically done their bests to solve the problems but this country has remained as the sick man of Europe for quite a long time suffering one of the biggest downfalls both politically and economically. Ataturk´s new republic have fought with what remained from a war struck population of economically and physically battered people. The nationalist sentiment that was instrumental in keeping Turks together around a new state inevitably irritated non-Turkish population.  Like many times in the past (during the Ottoman times) the friction effectively hampered economic recovery. Kurds rejected help from central government and resorted to terrorist acts. The central government has spent 1/3 of GNP on armament. This scheme served the best interes of arm producing countries who supplied both parties. The Kurdish party have generated resources by getting involved in mafia type organizations in Turkey and Iraq at the extent of which they began collaborating with other mafias established in Europe and Russia and began trafficking drugs and what they call white woman.  So much money flowed into the system caused corruption on both sides of the border (Iraq and Turkey).  The recent mass murder was a result of rangers (village guards)  getting involved in

matters not directly related to their official assignments. These are supposed to be friendly Kurds who would protect their villages in case of a terrorist attack. In actual fact, those are tribesmen who applied for village guard duty so that they are not slain by the rival tribe and vice versa.

The US government despite openly denouncing the act of PKK have not been able  prevent any of the attacks that the seperatist groups have been organizing against Turkey. I believe they could if they really wanted to. When John calls Bill he probably tells him not to disturb the established status quo in the region. This system is good for arm dealers and as everybody knows arm dealers don´t care about people their lives, their nations or their prosperity. All they care is money... One of the objectives of the America´s invasion of  Iraq was elimating the potential of having a powerful Iraq. Kurds have been chosen as the allies of the invaders who brought the region democracy and peace. In return, regardless of the statistical realities, they have been granted vast political representation in an Arabic country. Kurds have become the new owners of the country. All the valuable papers have been trusted to them which they took the freedom of modifying to their heart´s content. Arabic property became Kurdish.

This is what has been causing the 12 year olds getting married in Turkey.

  It does seem to be a desparate search for justification of islamic ways. ?what u mean here catwomen?

What I mean is that Alameda (and many others in general) are using this ridiculous comparison to rationalize polygamy, which for any objective, reasonable person does not need much discussion to be condemned.

 I am also an athiest through choice . I did not choose to become an athiest   just so i could have sexual freedom. I just find it so hypocritical that western women are classed as permissive because they have numerous sexual partners. What about the pleasure marrages of the eastern world?

What is a pleasure marrage!!

How a pleasure marriage works

In essence, a pleasure marriage is a legal union between a man (married or not) and a single woman, for periods as brief as a few minutes or as long as a lifetime. In most cases, the marriage is a simple agreement between the two, stating for how long it will be and what would be expected during the time, i.e., travel, a house, how often the man will visit the woman, and how much the dowry, also called mahr or "bride price", will be. This can range from virtually nothing to hundreds of thousands of Riyals, Dinars – whatever the currency in the country where it happens.

A woman agreeing to a pleasure marriage that involves a one-time encounter might be able to count on about SAR 370 (about R60. For an al-misyar that runs longer, she might be paid SAR 1 000 a month, though the amounts vary widely and can depend on whether she has children. Sometimes the marriage is conducted in an official capacity in the presence of a state official or Imam, sometimes two witnesses to the agreement are required, and in other cases an oral agreement between the two parties will do just fine.

The husband may void the temporary marriage earlier than agreed. If he does and they have had sexual intercourse, he must give her the full bride price. If they have not had intercourse, he can give her half that amount, though the recommended precaution is that he should give her the full amount.

If a man already has the allowed maximum of four wives, he can still take a temporary bride as she doesn´t count as a permanent wife, but he cannot have more than four temporary wives at the same time. The wife would be allowed to leave the house without her husband´s permission, and he is responsible for any children resulting from the encounter. Some Muslim sects believe it is allowed for a man to marry a non-Muslim, as long as she is a Christian or Jew, i.e., of the "People of the Book". If the woman is still a virgin, she needs her guardian´s permission to enter al-misyar.

Ultimately, the man benefits from fewer financial commitments, is not obliged to live with his wife and he sets the conditions for marriage. He can pass by at any time, in the morning, afternoon or evening. And he does not have to stay over.

***Married women can´t enter a misyar marriage, but a married man can. Men can void the contract at any time; women don´t have that option unless it´s negotiated at the outset. The couple agrees not to have children. A woman who unintentionally gets pregnant can have an abortion but must then pay a fine to a cleric***.

*** How hypocitical

I guess this is a text from Saoudi-Arabia (SAR = S.A. rial I guess)? If I read correctly a man can according to this text (law? Sura? Hadith?) have 8 women at the same time: 4 legally married and 4 as ´temporary´ wives. And a ´pleasure marriage´ to me is nothing more than an affair, even paid sometimes (prostitution?), for a duration of even less as ´a few minutes´!  I am very certain that I, as a Western woman with so called ´loose morals´ had have less sexual partners in my 46 years than a lot of the men who live by this text or than the surely very much younger men (boys!) working in the tourist industry in Turkey had. And I am called bad? How hypocrite! 

Daydreamer, I brought up these matters directly in response to your comments.  I believe the effect of 2,000 years of Christian rule has had an effect on how "Western" cultures view things.  It took 2,000 years to instill, I think 50 years of so is not enough time for those influences to dissipate.

I have no intention to force any religion on you. I am a firm believer in freedom of choice in religious matters.  After all if one is forced to follow any path, how sincere can their "faith" be?  If you had not mentioned, or insinuated official religious involvement in these matters, I would not have responded.  However, since you did, I replied.

You have accused Islam of many things that are simply not true.  As I mentioned, many of the things you talk about are remnents of pagan traditions, not Islam.  It is unfortunate there are so many uneducated illiterate Muslims in the world.  To concentrate on that aspect of the culture gives avery  warped view of things.  Of course no woman should be forced to marry against her will.....and of course child should not be allowed to marry. .....and those things that you accuse of being Islamic, are not Islamic.

I know from my mother forty or fifty years ago people get married at their early ages in Turkey ...but not recent years...i can say my parents are conservative i am 29 and i am still single...they do not me force to get married...time changes and it changes people as well..but i have to say that even 50 years ago i have never heard a twelve year old child get married...it is ridiculous  and impossible biologically...people are exaggerating what they hear about Turkey...

I know from my mother forty or fifty years ago people get married at their early ages in Turkey ...but not recent years...i can say my parents are conservative i am 29 and i am still single...they do not me force to get married...time changes and it changes people as well..but i have to say that even 50 years ago i have never heard a twelve year old child get married...it is ridiculous  and impossible biologically...people are exaggerating what they hear about Turkey...

Of course, and I did not suggest you or anyone enter into such a relationship.

Your statement primitive, if understood in the original meaning of the word "primal" is perhaps accurate.  However, calling if a humanitarian disaster is a subjective emotional reaction, not an objective analysis of a situation that has both evolutionary and historic precedents.. Calling something a disaster is a value conclusion based on what research? Do you know any such marriages? Have you ever interviewed any women who are in such a relationship? From where are you drawing your conclusions?
The world consists of many different cultures.  It is not one big uniculture.  It may not be for me or you, but obviously it is for some.

Am I to understand you are saying long term extramarital affairs are preferable?  Can you see no situation where such a solution might be implemented?

In truth, there is disagreement among Islamic schools of jurisprudence regarding the issue.  I have offered an objective analysis of an alternative life style.  I suggest you clear your mind of prejudices and take an objective look.

You are outraged at the prospect of polygamy, but same sex marriage is OK? So, I wonder what your take on bisexual matrimony would be. 

Actually, I think a secular state should get out of the "marriage" business and let everyone have domestic partnerships based on who they want to be designated as their primary next of kin, which could be a sexual partner or best friend.  Go to whatever house of worship you choose if you feel you need to be "married".

The reality of the situation is marriage as it has evolved in Western cultures comes out of Christian marriage where the couple were united as one, and that one was the man. The female took the man´s name and all but ceased to exist as a separate entity.  She had no possessions.  Thankfully, things have evolved a great deal since that time.

Alameda, do you need me to interview people who were killed by others in order for you to have an ´objective´ argument against murder?

I suppose that when all a person knows is polygamy type of a relationship, she/he won´t have the capacity or courage to object it, but that does not mean that better forms of marriage have evolved in some parts of the world.

I guess you are not knowledgable in matters concerning jurisprudence....?...you have not ever heard of the concept of Justifiable Homicide? ...........Prima Facie........you see things are rarely so clear cut as you imagine.

Alameda, let me disagree with you. I perceive it the other way around, it´s not that after years of Christian dominance people started enjoying sex. I wrote it before - Church´s teachings were in most cases just theory, people in Europe have had lots of sex - sinful in the eyes of priests but they didn´t keep abstinence You said that it was the upper class that indulged in profligacy, I disagree. It´s enough to read literature from that period and you´ll see it was different. Villagers were usually very "productive" both in and outside marriage. Actually, I think it was the middle class that was most prude. Anyway, people in Europe have had sex ever since two people met outside caves. No religion changed it, what changed is that they can now be open about it without causing false embarrassment of neighbours.

Christine, thanks for the post, it shows exactly what pleasures of Islam stand for. I prefer the social rules here, at least I know my husband won´t have to marry somebody else to get a shag

What always amuses me is how Muslims always emphasise allegedly lower status of women in the western society in the past, at the same time bragging about high position of women in Islam. Taking your husband´s surname means you ceased to exist while being wife number three marks your position significantly. Also, we´ve had a few queens in Europe (unmarried ones or married but still being the ruling monarch) - again, sign of women´s low status. How many women in Muslim countries were leaders of their nations? If I´m not mistaken women can´t even be judges according to Qran...Christian women were to have sex with their husbands only and only for procreation. And it was the same for the husbands, they could have sex only with their wife. In Islam a man can have 4 wives (whose duty is to serve him sexually in return for material goods) and numerous mistresses if only he is just to them. Wow, a sign of respect! Also, I read somewhere that only a man can divorce a woman, if it´s the wife who wants to divorce, she has to ask her husband to divorce her. Again - how fair.

Alameda, you´re right, I´m glad the position of women in the west evolved. Or actually, it didn´t evolve, we fought for it to improve. And we still do in a way. I hope one day Muslim women will take care of their rights too

Alameda, this is your usual argumentative style, you use an exception as an argument for the rule. You´re not intellectually honest.

Who said that a pleasure marriage is allowed in Islam?

It appears she has found an obscure reference from a expat South African woman who writes under the name  Laura of Arabia

When asked:

-What do you think about the Arabs?
The Arabs are courteous, but they rarely socialize with non-Saudis, or non-Muslims. Some people live here for years, and never even meet a Saudi.

Who is she??? Well done you also found the same link as me . I used this link because it was the one i found ar the time, but have read many articules before.

 You tell me

Her information can be found at the link I posted.  She is a Western housewife with aspirations at being an author.  She spent a couple of years in Saudi, she can not speak Arabic and did not associate with Saudis.

There is no such thing as strictly a Pleasure Marriage in Islam.  The author was sensationalizing her article by using a provocative title.  The institution she is talking about it called mu´ta marriage.  It is allowed in Shia Islam, but forbidden in Sunni Islam.  It is a hotly debated topic, however what she discribed in her article is far beyond the bounds.

As Islam is a legalistic religion,  some people look for loopholes....

Oh really?

When, Where and How???

 When!! whenever you want, Where!! on TC, How!! writting.

Yes hmmmm not for you but for who´s in light.

 What?

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2005-05-04-pleasure-marriage_x.ht 

http://www.memri.org/bin/opener.cgi?ID=IA29106

http://www.al-islam.org/encyclopedia/chapter6a/1.html

Some links to the subject above - are they all complete rubbish Alameda and QueenT? 

srry

sometimes i laugh alot...who never read Quran comin here talkin about muslim women? at least read Quran and our prophet Muhammed(s.a.v) mesaj about isLam then only u ll understnd more about muslim women... people hear somethin and comin comment here ...Im turkish and i never saw such things as u guys talkin...

   In isLam women and man Same...and Quran also sayin if u not behave good to your women..u r not from us..(real mumin)

   our prophet got 12 wives ...but got reason....i don care  what arap doin or others ...open and read BOOK to learn..don look people bfre  u complain about..

O Humanity! We created you from a male and female, and made you into peoples and tribes so that you might come to know each other. The noblest among you in Allah’s sight is the one of you who best performs his duty. Allah is All-Knowing, All-Aware. (Qur’an, 49:13)

 

Children of Adam! We have sent down clothing to you to conceal your private parts, and fine apparel, but the garment of heedfulness--that is best! That is one of Allah’s Signs, so that hopefully you will pay heed. (Qur’an, 7:26)

Do not covet what Allah has given to some of you in preference to others—men have a portion of what they acquire and women have a portion of what they acquire; but ask Allah for His bounty. Allah has knowledge of all things. (Qur’an, 4:32)

The men and women of the believers are friends of one another. They command what is right and forbid what is wrong, and perform prayer and give the alms, and obey Allah and His Messenger. They are the people on whom Allah will have mercy. Allah is Almighty, All-Wise. (Qur’an, 9:71)

[Believers are] those who say, “Our Lord, give us joy in our wives and children and make us a good example for those who guard against evil.” (Qur’an, 25:74)

Such people are truly racing towards good things, and they are the first to reach them. (Qur’an, 23:61)

 

Then We made Our chosen servants inherit the Book. But some of them wrong themselves; some are ambivalent; and some outdo each other in good by Allah’s permission. That is the great favor. (Qur’an, 35:32)

Anyone who acts rightly, male or female, being a believer, We will give them a good life and We will recompense them according to the best of what they did. (Qur’an, 16:97)

Forgot the Surah where it says a man is allowed to beat his wife? Or the one(s) that say the testimony of a woman is worth half of a man´s? Or... Or.... All the other ones? Yes, I´ve read the Koran. I have one here at home. Next to my Bible and I must say, I like them equally - as fairy tales.

 Trudy why u tryin to be funny? why we came to this world? coz of worship ourgod.. and he sent us book to follow his orders...do or not do is urproblem...we all got brain...many other countries man also beat their wife´s..is it right of coz not...muslim also do non muslim also do...yes we not accept it..but if everythin is perfct whts the reason we are here for?

   this is exam lady...thts why got hell and paradice...

 if islam really is way of urlife...i don think u ll beat urwife...coz god see everythin we are doin...if u wan to make him happy sure we gotta do somethin good..

 And i cant forgt the surah...coz they teach me how to go what to do..

I´m not trying to be funny, I only replied your statement that man and woman are equal which is obviously not. And your referring to other men beating their wives is correct that it happens, but then don´t get approval from their religion!

 Sampion Besiktas this year trudy

 I have read the quran. Have you read the bible??

Thanks thanks thanks

Link number one does not work

Link number two is a propaganda site which lacks credibility.....

Yigal Carmon — MEMRI´s founder and President. Carmon is fluent in Arabic. He served as Colonel in the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) Intelligence Branch from 1968 to 1988. He was Acting Head of Civil Administration in the West Bank and the adviser on Arab Affairs to the Civil Administration from 1977 to 1982. He advised Prime Ministers Shamir and Rabin on Countering Terrorism from 1988 to 1993. In 1991 and 1992 Carmon was a senior member of the Israeli Delegation to peace negotiations with Syria in Madrid and Washington

Link number three is a Shia islam site, which is what I said, it´s a Shia practice.  I did not read through the whole thing....I have heard the practice is on an upswing in Iraq now, and it is practiced in Iran among the Shia.

It is Surat Al Nisa verse # 34

It is a controversial ayat.....and one people site a great deal.

Which version? King James? What Quran translation?.....just curious that a self proclaimed athiest reads such material.....

Link No. 1 - sorry I left the last character off -

http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2005-05-04-pleasure-marriage_x.htm

Link No. 2 - who says it lacks credibility?

Link No. 3 -  If it is a Shia practice, then it is practised by Muslims - I don´t think Christine cited any particular country.

 I did not waken up one morning and say, oh today i think i will become an athiest.I looked into many  different religions, read different scripes and spoke to people about their faiths and then i made my choice.

 Why would you be curious?  Perhaps this person wasn´t always an athiest.  Or perhaps they are well read and wanted to get some good fiction in their library.  Your comment sounds smug as usual alameda. 

 Don´t be silly LIR.....alameda-the-great just said it lacks crediblity.  That makes it true, doesn´t it?????

You do want accurate information, do you not? The practice in the article she posted (without attribution) as discribed is inaccurate.  Iprovided the name of what it seemed she might have been talking about, and specified thecorrect name in addition to where and by whom it is  practiced.  I also posted the credentials of the author of the article...the article you referenced verifies my post, in as much as it is practiced now in Iraq bysome  Shia....not the larger Islamic community.

Even within the Shia community, it is controversial....as your article says.

As to the MERA site.....

Claims of bias

Brian Whitaker, the Middle East editor for the Guardian newspaper in the United Kingdom, has been one of the most outspoken critics of MEMRI, writing: "My problem with Memri is that it poses as a research institute when it´s basically a propaganda operation," to "further the political agenda of Israel." Whitaker has also complained that "MEMRI´s website does not mention you [Carmon] or your work for Israeli intelligence. Nor does it mention MEMRI´s co-founder, Meyrav Wurmser, and her extreme brand of Zionism.... Given your political background, it´s legitimate to ask whether MEMRI is a trustworthy vehicle."

Claims of selectivity

Several critics have accused MEMRI of selectivity. They state that MEMRI consistently picks for translation and dissemination the most extreme views, which portray the Arab and Muslim world in a negative light, while ignoring moderate views that are often found in the same media outlets. 

According to Juan Cole, Professor of Modern Middle East History at the University of Michigan, MEMRI has a tendency to "cleverly cherry-pick the vast Arabic press, which serves 300 million people, for the most extreme and objectionable articles and editorials"  Laila Lalami, writing in The Nation, states that MEMRI "consistently picks the most violent, hateful rubbish it can find, translates it and distributes it in e-mail newsletters to media and members of Congress in Washington".[25] As a result, critics such as Ken Livingstone state, MEMRI´s analyses are "distortion."

I guess you did not look at the link I provided.....

More on MEMRI

Issues of reliability and veracity

MEMRI is operated by a group closely associated with the Israeli intelligence organizations. Now, in an article in Haaretz, we find that the Israeli Army has sought to plant stories about "terrorism" in the press, and

    "Psychological warfare officers were in touch with Israeli journalists covering the Arab world, gave them translated articles from Arab papers (which were planted by the [Israel Defense Forces] IDF) and pressed the Israeli reporters to publish the same news here." --Amos Harel, IDF reviving psychological warfare unit, Haaretz, January 25, 2005.

This should raise a question or two about the reliability and veracity of the stories peddled by MEMRI.

This is what Prof. Juan Cole had to say about this:

    "So is MEMRI, which translates articles from the Arabic press into English for thousands of US subscribers, in any way involved in all this? Its director formerly served in… Israeli military intelligence. How much of what we "know" from "Arab sources" about "Hizbullah terrorism" was simply made up by this fantasy factory in Tel Aviv?
    As someone who reads the Arabic press quite a lot, this sort of revelation is extremely disturbing.
    I also saw an allegation that British military intelligence had planted stories in the US press about Saddam´s Iraq.
    You begin to wonder how much of what you think you know is just propaganda manufactured by some bored colonel. No wonder post-Baath Iraq looks nothing like what we were led to to expect by the press, including the Arab press!"

 Let´s discuss opinions not people.

I guess asking questions regarding scholarship sounds smug to some.  FYI am curious what translation she is using for reference.  It is a legitimate question I believe.  It´s a vast subject on which many spend their whole lives on.

 It´s impossible for you to understand how pompous you come across......but I will keep pointing it out when I get the chance. 

 What are you?  A knight in shining hypocrisy?  I would love it if you would tell me how my comment is any worse than recent comments you have made to Trudy or Alpha? 

Tell me.....you never see the smugness in alameda´s comments?  I really am amused by how blind some people are!!! 

Equality of sexes in Islam? Just a brief summary of things said so far:

* men can have up to 4 wives, women can have 1 husband -> inequality

* men divorce their wives by saying a line 3 times, women have to as for their husbands to divorce them -> inequality

* pleasure marriages -> inequality

* men can beat their wives if they are disobedient (Alameda - don´t start with the 15 translations of "daraba" as we know others don´t fit - even your holy prophe struck Aisha when she left the house without his permission)

* men´s word is worth twice as much as women´s

If you want more just read

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/

and, yes, the site is biased. But biased doesn´t mean wrong about women´s rights in Islam (and I bet the authors have read Qran)

I´m sorry you feel that way.  I am impressed, and thank you for your concern for my demeanor.  Hopefully with your kind guidance I will improve.

Just bringing it back to topic

was reading an article on this subject which covers the rights of the child and how it stands within the law

International Human Rights Instruments and Early Marriage
A number of human rights instruments lay down norms to be applied to marriage,
covering issues of age, consent, equality within marriage, and the personal and
property rights of women. The key instruments and articles are as follows (paraphrased
for clarity in some cases):
Article 16 of the 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) states: (1) Men
and women of full age … have the right to marry and found a family. They are entitled
to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution. (2) Marriage shall
be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending parties. Similar
provisions are included in the 1966 International Covenant on Economic, Social and
Cultural Rights and the 1966 International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
Article 1 of the 1956 Supplementary Convention on the Abolition of Slavery, the Slave
Trade, and Institutions and Practices Similar to Slavery includes in the institutions and
practices similar to slavery: Article 1(c) Any institution or practice whereby: (i) A
woman, without the right to refuse, is promised or given in marriage on payment of a
consideration in money or in kind to her parents, guardian, family …
Articles 1, 2, and 3 of the 1964 Convention on Consent to Marriage, Minimum Age for
Marriage and Registration of Marriages state: (1) No marriage shall be legally entered
into without the full and free consent of both parties, such consent to be expressed by
them in person … as prescribed by law. (2) States Parties to the present Convention shall
… specify a minimum age for marriage (“not less than 15 years” according to the nonbinding
recommendation accompanying this Convention). No marriage shall be legally
entered into by any person under this age, except where a competent authority has
granted a dispensation as to age, for serious reasons, in the interests of the intending
spouses … (3) All marriages shall be registered … by the competent authority.
Article 16.1 of the 1979 Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination
against Women prescribes equally for men and women: (a) The same right to enter into
marriage; (b) The same right freely to choose a spouse and to enter into marriage only
with their free and full consent; … Article 16.2 states: The betrothal and the marriage of
a child shall have no legal effect, and all necessary action, including legislation, shall be
taken to specify a minimum age for marriage. Article XXI of the 1990 African Charter on
the Rights and Welfare of the Child states: Child marriage and the betrothal of girls and
boys shall be prohibited and effective action, including legislation, shall be taken to
specify the minimum age of marriage to be eighteen years.

Early Marriage and the Convention on the Rights of the Child (CRC)
The CRC has been ratified by all countries with the exception of the United States and
Somalia. Virtually every provision of the CRC is of some relevance to the issue of early
marriage. Among the most pertinent, however, are the following (paraphrased for
clarity in some cases):
Article 1: A child means every human being below the age of eighteen years unless,
under the law applicable to the child, majority is attained earlier.
Article 2: Freedom from discrimination on any grounds, including sex, religion, ethnic or
social origin, birth or other status.
Article 3: In all actions concerning children … the best interests of the child shall be a
primary consideration.
Article 6: Maximum support for survival and development.
Article 12: The right to express his or her views freely in all matters affecting the child,
in accordance with age and maturity.
Article 19: The right to protection from all forms of physical or mental violence, injury or
abuse, maltreatment or exploitation, including sexual abuse, while in the care of
parents, guardian, or any other person.
Article 24: The right to health, and to access to health services; and to be protected
from harmful traditional practices.
Articles 28 and 29: The right to education on the basis of equal opportunity.
Article 34: The right to protection from all forms of sexual exploitation and sexual abuse.
Article 35: The right to protection from abduction, sale or trafficking.
Article 36: The right to protection from all forms of exploitation prejudicial to any aspect
of the child’s welfare.

This rather indepth article can be found here

 You have a point. I have also proven how things get out of hand when one personalizes things. It is a lot easier to see the truth when your reason is not jettisoned by the hot wind of debate. I did not want to deny my own thought and make that warning exclusively for you. I wish that everyone could stop targeting one another. I don´t want either friends or enemies here. "Let´s discuss opinions" still makes sense...

Biased.....you have to be kidding!  That is one of the most hateful  Islamaphobic sites I´ve seen.  It sure looks like a  propaganda site with an agenda.  On the list of recommended books is one by neocon 

Robert Spencer, who is a fan of Gert Wilders....Spencer is also is the director of  jihadwatch....the word biased hardly expresses an accurate discription of the  site.  Other authors are Walid Phares, a former commander of the Lebanese Forces Militia, which was allied with the IDF......now would you think it is possible these people might have an agenda....?

We could go on and on and on.....as we are not supposed to get into religious arguments here, but seeing as you seem to be interested, I suggest you read something by, or you can listen and watch,  Karen Armstrong.  She is a true scholar of comparative religions, and an ex nun who does not have a political agenda....she is a true seeker........or you could read something by a noted Muslim femminist and Muslim scholar,  Riffat Hassan.

 Good links, thanks

I have been extremely go0d and stayed out of this completely OT debate. (Kudos to me.)

However, I cannot help but point out that it is very easy to mix oil and water.

See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emulsion

Apart from that, I fully respect the right of anyone to believe in their stone-age superstitions religion.

I would ask that they respect my right to regard their beliefs with amused scorn, but they never do. I have read the Koran and personally find it quite ridiculous. However the Bible is *even more* ridiculous (read Genesis 19 for a good laugh... God apparently is a fan of both rape and incest).

Actually that Biblical reference gets me to within shouting distance of the original topic. Yay for me again.

Ohhhh someone fun!!!!  YAY!!!   

Manning, This is the off topic section.  This thread began with a discussion on early marriage, and in typical TC form, digressed.

I do not believe anyone here has demanded of you anything other than what the forum rules require.  Your beliefe status is your business, and the same goes for others.  As I have said numerous times.  I am more interested in promoting tolerance between groups. 

As members of Space Ship Earth,  where we arrive may not be at all pleasant (given all the bloodshed spent in disagreement),  unless we learn to work with some type of harmony.  Orchestra have many instruments, such as violines and  flutes, but they make beautiful music together.  Nature shows us how important diversity is.  Could you live on a diet of only one thing? As the world gets smaller and smaller we are elbow to elbow with many diverse groups, who may or may not agree with us.  One thing that I see as of prime importance is that we learn to live and let live.   Insulting, belittling, or dehumanizing other groups does not promote that goal.  What that does is set up defensive reaction, but little contemplation or introspection.

Religous Tolerance

I found this group that is interesting and respectful discourse on various belief systems....even athiests...

perhaps you would find it interesting and informative.

If I have offended you, please accept my apology.