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...