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.