Yes, Aisha was betrothed to Muhammad when she was six years old, but two years old? Isn't that a bit much even for Pakistani law? Well, no. Note what Rashid Rahman says below. It's not that she's a minor, it's that it's against her will. So if someone slips a piece of candy to the little one and thereby obtains her consent to the marriage, I guess it's ok, once the fine is paid. "Pakistanis Order Betrothal of 2-Year-Old," from AP, with thanks to all who sent this in:
MULTAN, Pakistan - A tribal council in Pakistan has ordered the betrothal of a 2-year-old girl to a man 40 years older to punish her uncle for an alleged affair with the man's wife, police said Monday.The council decreed the girl must marry 42-year-old Mohammed Altaf, her uncle's cousin, when she turns 18, police said.
Altaf, a farmer, divorced his 32-year-old wife over her alleged love affair with his 20-year-old cousin, Mohammed Akmal. Akmal, a bachelor and also a farmer, has no children.
Altaf asked tribal elders in the village of Kacha Chohan, about 215 miles west of the city of Multan in Punjab province, to convene a panchayat, or council, on Feb. 15 to arbitrate and propose a punishment. As punishment, the elders ordered the girl's betrothal and ruled Akmal should also pay a $3,800 fine to the husband....
Police chief Maqsoodul Hassan said an investigation has been started into the case involving the 2-year-old girl, but they have made no arrests as no one had filed a complaint....
Rashid Rahman, a lawyer and Multan-based coordinator with the independent Human Rights Commission of Pakistan, condemned the village council's decision.
"These types of panchayats are illegal and nobody has the right to take a decision about a child's life," he said. "This country has its legal system and all decisions should be taken under it."
He said that the betrothal of a minor did not itself break the law, but forcing a woman to marry against her will carried a maximum 14-year jail sentence. Underage marriage is also illegal but is only punishable by a fine.
What's that? You don't believe me about Muhammad and Aisha? Here it is straight from the hadith collection accepted by Muslims as most reliable:
Sahih Bukhari, Volume 5, Book 58, Number 234:
Narrated Aisha:
The Prophet engaged me when I was a girl of six (years). We went to Medina and stayed at the home of Bani-al-Harith bin Khazraj. Then I got ill and my hair fell down. Later on my hair grew (again) and my mother, Um Ruman, came to me while I was playing in a swing with some of my girl friends. She called me, and I went to her, not knowing what she wanted to do to me. She caught me by the hand and made me stand at the door of the house. I was breathless then, and when my breathing became Allright, she took some water and rubbed my face and head with it. Then she took me into the house. There in the house I saw some Ansari women who said, "Best wishes and Allah's Blessing and a good luck." Then she entrusted me to them and they prepared me (for the marriage). Unexpectedly Allah's Apostle came to me in the forenoon and my mother handed me over to him, and at that time I was a girl of nine years of age.
Sahih Bukhari, Volume 7, Book 62, Number 64:
Narrated 'Aisha:
that the Prophet married her when she was six years old and he consummated his marriage when she was nine years old, and then she remained with him for nine years (i.e., till his death).
Just to refresh everybody's memory, here is the story of Aisha, the child wife of Muhammad:
http://www.faithfreedom.org/Articles/sina/ayesha.htm
The thought of an old man becoming aroused by a child is one of the most disturbing thoughts that makes us cringe as it reminds us of pedophilia and the most despicable people. It is difficult to accept that the Holy Prophet married Aisha when she was 6-years-old and consummated his marriage with her when she was 9. He was then, 54 years old.
It is good to have Bukhari quoted directly, because one of the elements in Muslim apologetics is to deny Aisha's age -- to make references to "it isn't clear how old she was" or "some sources say she was 18 or 19." This is nonsense, and the speaker knows it is nonsense when he utters it to the credulous Infidels at Mosque Outreach gatherings and Muslim-Christian or Muslim-Jewish "Dialogues" which of course become Muslim monologues, delivered so sweetly, with furrowed brows, and such expressions of sincerity (just like Cpl. Wassef Ali Hassoun's speech to the press, with that convincing "Semper Fi" at the end -- even many skeptics found his performance heart-warming).
Aisha was 6 when betrothed, nine when she had sexual intercourse with Muhammad. Muslims like to insist that he was not a "pedophile" because, you see, "pedophiles" do not marry older women, and most of Muhammad's 9 or 11 (but who's counting?) wives were not pre-adolescent. But that isn't the point. The point is that, as uswa hasana, a model for all time, whatever Muhammad does justifies the behavior of Muslims through time and space.
The most important modern example of this influence of the manners and morals of someone believed (by Believers) to have lived in 7th century Arabia, was the Ayatollah Khomeini, who on coming to power promptly reduced the marriageable age of girls to nine. If you didn't know why he, that learned Shi'a theologian, did this before, you know why now.
Before you guys get too excited, I'm pretty sure Jewish tradition says that Rebecca was betrothed when she was 3. That is not of course modern Jewish practice.
OT but related to womens human rights in GCC states (Oman, Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait, the UAE, and the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia):
Amnesty International (AI) today wrote to the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) urging it to implement the specific recommendations of the Conference on Violence and Discrimination against women in countries of the GCC which specifically relate to the GCC. The Conference took place in Bahrain from 8-9 January 2005.
Participants in the Conference called on the GCC governments to "introduce special legislation criminalising violence against women" and ensure that there is no impunity for the perpetrators of such violence. Participants also called on the GCC to "establish a regional centre to collate regular statistics on violence against women and to conduct studies on social, legal and Islamic law issues concerning the topic of violence and discrimination against women."
http://www.amnestyusa.org/news/document.do?id=80256DD400782B8480256FAF00677A3A
The conferences's recommendations include:
- Introducing special legislation criminalising violence against women.
- Enabling and giving women the right to fully participate in political life in order to support their efforts to combat violence and discrimination against them.
- Adopting legislation criminalising all forms of discrimination against women in jobs and professions.
- Raising awareness amongst relevant members of the executive, judicial and legislative authorities in the GCC countries and provide them with legal studies concerning international human rights standards.
A couple notes:
1) In the past, Sudan used the religious freedom clauses in the UDHR and ICCPR to legitimize practices that are permitted in Shari'a but forbidden in international human rights law (i.e., enforceing women's human rights under the UDHR and ICCPR was a violation of freedom of religion in Sudan). They claimed that attempts to enforce international standards concerning women's human rights was an attack on Islam.
2) Some of these GCC states are not party to the world's major human rights conventions because these laws constitute secular, not divine, law (Shari'a). It is highly unlikely this attitude is going to change on account of this conference.
Did Aisha bear children to Mohammad?
If not,then I think I have an idea why she didn't.Perhaps this was God's way of telling Mohammad that what he was doing was a sin,by speaking through Aisha's flesh.
http://www.fistulafoundation.org/aboutfistula/
JLP
"She's two, she's beautiful, and she's mine"?
Here is proof that the Koran itself allows sex with pre-pubrty chidlren:
http://www.faithfreedom.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=239
And here is proof that Aisha was pre-pubescent when Muhammad first had sex with her on her wedding day:
http://www.apostatesofislam.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=357
The marriage of children was sometimes allowed in pre-modern Europe in order to join together important families and patrimonies. However, to the best of my knowledge, such marriages were not expected to be consummated. And I cannot remember a single instance of a child being married to an adult; the only ones I know about were pairs of children. I very much doubt whether even the worst of medieval robber barons would have been impressed by Muhammed's reversion to pedophilia.
Maybe it wont seem so odd when you submit
In 2002, another village council near Multan ordered a woman gang-raped as punishment for her brother's sexual relations with another woman. A court later convicted six men who perpetrated the rape and sentenced them to death. They are appealing the sentences.
maybe not
You know, even cattle ranchers know to keep the young heifers from breeding too soon. It can ruin a cow to have a calf too early, I guess little girls do not merit even that protection in islam.
"She's 2,she's beautiful,and she's mine"
I'll bet Niel Diamond is spinning in his grave.
JLP
Islam is a cult of death that legitimizes selfish, evil behavior. These people are cowardly beasts.
Is Niel Diamond dead?
sp. Neil
Neil Diamond, or Ringo Starr?
A friend of Jihadwatch claims to have heard the latter live, singing this very song some time ago to nurses and others at Sancta Maria Hospital, in Massachusetts, where Barbara Bach's brother worked at the time.
Could be.
Sane people make the RIGHT choices, insane people do things like this and if the society accepts this well then thats just "NUTS".
These United States; forever challenged, will be in this area for a very long time. Just when you thought you heard it all and expect nothing less here it comes right at us, the most vile inhumane acts committed by the people of moslem faith(LOL)should not be tolerated.
This is Islamic morals. This is what that basketball player, whatshisname, wants for America.
I think it's the Islamic math system that causes the confusion,Muhammed must have used his
knowledge to foll his followers and here's how he may have done it.
My dear followers I have been bless by Allah to wed a 6 year old virgin and in time she will
be close to my age,this is because I am 40 and she's 10 so I'm 4 times her age,in 5 years she's 15 and I'm 45 so I'm 3 times her age,in 15 more years she's 30 and I'm 60 so she's now only 1/2 my
age and you only need to think about how long it would be before we're the same age.
Altaf, a farmer, divorced his 32-year-old wife over her alleged love affair with his 20-year-old cousin, Mohammed Akmal. Akmal, a bachelor and also a farmer, has no children.
something don't jive here. if he has no kids, how can his 2 year old be given to his cousin???? unless they are waiting for him to have a daughter??
Coming from a Native American I hope you realize that the founding fathers of North America were quite similar! Hope the fall from your high horse isn't so jarring.
Big Red I dont think the Cavalry ever took a 2 year old for his wife but nevertheless their were atrocities on both sides and deals cut with foreign governments against the settlers.Much has been learned from our past and more must be imagined in our future.
It is saddening to see that hostilities still arise about these things in today's society,and while my people are persecuted unmercifully everyday without reserve(BIKERS) by the feds I fight for the Soverneignty of these United States however misguided she might be.
If the war on terror ended tomorrow that would free me up on another line of defense against the liberty's being casually dismissed at will and to challenge some tax laws.
Turn those negatives into positives
I'm curious: how were the founding fathers quite similar? They married two-year olds?
Geoff
Yeah, I'm not sure the founding fathers married 2 year olds or got up to any similar sort of convoluted tribal payback weirdness like the article here. People like to dig up things from previous centuries, to use as a sort of moral equivalence argument. Like, who are we to talk, we're just as bad. Nobody's saying we're perfect, and sure Western societies got up to some terrible things, and still do. Problem with Islamic societies, is they still get up to ancient tribal stuff today, still insist on doing things like they used to regardless of what we know now about how it hurts people or damages society.
The only reason we have a problem with Islam is what it's doing TODAY, not 500 years ago. They're still on their ancient tribal jihad thing today. Western societies aren't into sacrificing first born kids, stoning people, burning witches, or slavery any more. We realized our mistakes, the hurt and damage of all that, and moved forward.
But Islam stays behind, and we get their apologists making excuses for them and insisting we shouldn't be the ones to criticize because of what our own societies got up to in some far off time. Makes no sense, but I find you get that a lot. Criticize Western society all you want, they'll join in with gusto, but turn the criticism towards Islam and oops, it's like some horrendous faux pas.
Feralee - well said. This is the point Ive been trying to make on Harry's Blog, where I post as Not-so-Newcomer (formerly Newcomer) An extract shows how this is falling on deaf ears:
Not so newcomer: I'm not intolerant of all Muslims. Only those who believe that:
1 Women are deficient intelligence to men
2 Women are entitled to half the inheritance of men.
3 Women's testemony is half that of a man.
4 Adulterers (in practice generally adulteresses) deserve death
5 Rape victims who cannot find four male witnesses to exhonerate them should be put to death.
6 Unbelievers should be put to death.
7 Apostates should be put to death.
8 Jews are cursed by Allah and were turned into Apes and Pigs.
9 Gays should be put to death.
10 Women should be covered up except for their hands and face.
I could go on. I am extremely tolerant of all Muslims who do not believe any of the above. I am also very much opposed to:
1 All Amish who stone homosexuals to death.
2 All Buddhists who fly planes into tall buildings.
3 All Quakers who believe that non-Quakers should pay a poll tax with due submission or convert.
4 All Zoroastrians who strap explosive belts to themselves and blow themselves up in Pizza parlours.
5 All Presbetarians who believe that women who do not cover themselves up deserve to be raped.
6 All Druze who believe that women should not tap their feet too loud lest it arouse men's lust.
7 All Druids who believe that reciting jocular poetry making fun of the 'prophet' Mohammed deserve to be murdered in cold blood.
8 All Jains who believe that sexual intercourse under the pretext of marriage with a nine year old girl is acceptable because their 'prophet' did it.
9 All Hindus who ban music, painting and sculpture.
10 All Christians who torture an old man to death for money.
Check out all these references in the Koran and Hadith. All Islamic sources. They are all true.
Posted by Not-so-newcomer at February 24, 2005 02:40 AM
Not-so-newcomer:
You seem to lack a display of tolerance concerning one particular religion.
Is this some sort of anti-semitism?
Posted by Arthur Dent at February 24, 2005 03:16 AM
No, Arthur Dent, I am not intolerant of any religion in particular. I am merely intolerant of:
People, of whatever religion, who believe that:
1 Women are deficient intelligence to men
2 Women are entitled to half the inheritance of men.
3 Women's testemony is half that of a man.
4 Adulterers (in practice generally adulteresses) deserve death
5 Rape victims who cannot find four male witnesses to exhonerate them should be put to death.
6 Unbelievers should be put to death.
7 Apostates should be put to death.
8 Jews are cursed by Allah and were turned into Apes and Pigs.
9 Gays should be put to death.
10 Women should be covered up except for their hands and face
11 Music and sculpture should be banned.
12 Women should not tap their feet too loud lest it arouse men's lust.
and so on. I would condemn anyone who was in favour of any of the above rules. Surely nobody on this website would endorse them.
People of all religions and atheists who believe the above should be condemned. Muslims who believe none of the above are cool dudes.
Posted by Not-so-newcomer at February 24, 2005 03:28 AM
N-S-newcomer: That's all good - and obviously I agree with you in as far as the substance of your last comments go. But, it's partly about the emphasis. You slightly remind me of a French girl I knew at Oxford who used to say that Islam was a threat to the western way of life and specifically to the French state - largely because of the kind of things you outline above. But ask muslims in Britain if they'd agree with any of that twaddle (good word!) and the overwhelmingly vast majoriy would be offended at the very suggestion. Saying that these reactions are specifically *Islamic* reactions is unhelpful, and not even true.
There's plenty of anti-semitism in Christianity. And there's plenty of homophobia in Judaism. I'm suggesting that these are things which *religious* extremists have in common, not *Islamic* extemists. I think your particular emphasis is unfair on people who happen to identify as muslim and go about their everyday lives like the rest of us - and could lead to innaccurate cultural stereotypes. The reason, surely, that we dislike Islamic reactionaries is precisely becasue those who suffer most are *other muslims* - we should be on their side rather than tarring them (intentionally or otherwise) with specious brushes.
Posted by Ben at February 24, 2005 04:00 AM
Ben:
'You slightly remind me of a French girl'
Eeeeek!!
But seriously, the point I'm making, perhaps labouring is:
If the cap fits, wear it!
The Hebrew Bible commands stoning of homosexuals, adulterers and so forth. So yes, I condemn any Jews who stone adulterers and gays.
'ask muslims in Britain if they'd agree with any of that twaddle (good word!) and the overwhelmingly vast majoriy would be offended at the very suggestion.'
Good, the I have no problem with the overwhelmingly vast majority of Muslims in Britain.
'Saying that these reactions are specifically *Islamic* reactions is unhelpful, and not even true. '
Fine, I condemn anyone who has these reactions, whether Islamic or not. Methodists who believe in polygamy and concubinage, holy war to spread their religion, taxation of non-believers receive my condemnation, as do Druids, Animists and Confucians, should they happen to share those beliefs.