A morsel of cultural self-defense. "No recognition for polygamous marriage: A-G," from Australia's ABC News, June 25 (thanks to all who sent this in):
The Federal Government has rejected calls from two Muslim leaders to recognise polygamous marriage.The President of the Islamic Friendship Association of Australia, Keysar Trad, says women should be allowed to enter into a polygamous marriage if they choose to.
His view is supported by Sheikh Khalil Chami from the Islamic Welfare Centre in Sydney.
The Sheikh says he is regularly asked to perform polygamous marriage ceremonies but declines.
But of course!
Attorney-General Robert McLelland says the practice is against the law."There is absolutely no way that the Government will be recognising polygamist relationships," he said.
"They are unlawful and they will remain as such."
Good. But what will the multiculti relativists say? This one bears watching.
Let's hope Canada and the US take a lesson from Australia. Aside from any moral and women's rights issues involved, the thought of my tax dollars going to support multiple wives and herds of little jihadis in training makes me crazy.
Since the multi-culturalists have spent decades drumming into the minds of citizens of the West that all cultures, belief systems, etc are equal and equally valid, I fear it won't be long before someone in a position like the Attorney General goes along with the moslems on polygamy and other facets of sharia. If one subscribes to such a multi-culture world view, what possible reason could one give to opposing sharia?
Expel polygamists. Expel those who sanction, under an alternative legal system that goes unrecognized in Australia, and in spirit and letter flatly contradicts the laws and customs of Australia, polygamy.
Multi-cultural relativism isnt the only way to skin a cat , the assault on marriage and its definition is well on its way. So when the rule of law is changed to accommodate same sex marriage , polygamy cant be far behind. And those who oppose it will be sidelined as religious throwbacks who cant abide by the new laws and customs ... and then the expulsion of these 'agents of intolerance' will then be called for by the gate keepers of the new moral order. The world is changing beneath your feet, from many different directions , with the single aim of diversity and equality for all... that to get upset by calls for polygamy is almost quaint. To fight Islam's spread you would have to turn back the social tide in the West...which is impossible, just look at the E.U.
The Australia Labor party is a 'progressive' political entity , sooner or later , same sex marriage will occur , then polygamy.
Paging all those Australians here who regard the Muslim demand for official recognition of Muslim polygamy, as an intolerable insult to our polity, our laws and our customs: write, now, today, to the Attorney-General and assure him of your complete support for the stand that he is taking.
Write, also, to your state and federal members of parliament urging them to support Mr McLelland. Write to the Prime Minister and the Leader of the Opposition, likewise.
Parties such as Family First should be contacted, also.
Mr 'Xavier', I cannot work out whether you are threatening, gloating and boasting in anticipation of the Muslim triumph, or merely wallowing in defeatist despair.
To contact Mr McClelland, who is also a sitting MP, representing theElectoral Division of Barton (NSW):
The Hon Robert McClelland MP
Title: Attorney General.
Party: Australian Labor Party
PO Box 6022
House of Representatives
Parliament House
Canberra ACT 2600
Tel: (02) 6277 7300
Fax: (02) 6273 4102
The Parliament of Australia webpage has a helpful section which advises the proper terms of address to be used for addressing members of parliament.
Written letters to Mr McClelland should be addressed as follows: on the envelope, 'The Hon Robert McClelland, MP' (I think perhaps one should add 'Attorney-General')
The correct salutation is 'Dear Sir' and one signs off 'yours faithfully'.
Follow this link to find out how to email him.
http://www.aph.gov.au/house/members/member.asp?id=JK6
Cheers to OZ for now, BUT...
When most Western governments (including the USofA after Barry Oblahblah becomes president) are going hell for leather to institutionalize homosexual marriage, I can't see what possible reason they will be able to muster for rejecting either Muslim or Old Mormon polygamy.
Secularism's enemy is Christianity first, last, and always; and it as a movement is too stupid and sunk in its own conceits to see in Islam a far more dangerous adversary. I'm sure as well that the wonderful people who want us all to bless the queer lifestyle will sooner or later see in Muhammad's marriage to Aisha a "legitimate" expression of cultural diversity.
Shoutout to Mr Spencer, Mr Fitzgerald, and Mr Ibrahim...this matter is important enough that perhaps you could see your way to writing brief, instructive letters to the Australian Attorney-General, yourselves?
I have emailed the Attorney-General, just now, with loud applause, and referring him to Joseph Schacht's 'Introduction to Islamic Law', and to 'Reliance of the Traveller', and recommending that he consult Rev Dr Mark Durie, for further information, and to know just how important it is that he should block all Muslim attempts inside Australia to get major elements of sharia officially recognised. I emphasised the massive contradiction between the sharia code and everything we in the west recognise and uphold as human rights.
I have also emailed my Federal MP.
Perhaps, if Australia can openly reject such key elements of sharia as polygamy, and not only reject sharia, but punish those who practise it in defiance of Australian law, other countries may gain courage to follow suit.
yes , I am going through transistional phase...but more the latter I suppose. With intermittant bursts of denial. If you are indeed right ( an I am not the stage to accept that) then to prevent the Wests demographic march to oblivion ( if it is on this path) it would require the reversal of this "progressive" leftist liberal ideology that is suffused through Western society .. because to counter Islam we must judge , we must discern , we must impose , we must discriminate , we must disallow ... we must seek victory , we must be conquerors again.
Meanwhile the US may be about to elect Obama and the E.U. hegemony over its constituent parts looks inevitable...Nominal conservatives like Sarkozy , Merkel , Bush , McCain all reflect a 'New Times' world view ...even Olmert does. If we are facing a Islamic revolution bent on demographic victory .. where is our leadership?
Of course , 'demography is destiny' is not a tautology , our institutions and constitutions and traditions are strong, we are a pragmatic influencing culture that absorbs and accommodates and assimilates, and we have the capacity to adjust and alter course.
So its back to the soccer , (and the beer and the flag waving).
I was talking about this one at work today. See what these idiots have forgotten with all their demands for Australian law to be changed is... that if the law WAS changed to accomodate polygamous marriages.. do they really think it would only be changed to allow MEN to have multiple WIVES? Obviously in the HIGHLY UNLIKELY event the law was changed, it would of course have to accomodate WOMEN having multiple HUSBANDS as well.
In reality, the stealth jihadists have once again got it backwards, (A about T), if they want to institutionalise adultery, they need to unwind all the rights and equalities of women one by one, rather than just going for polygamous marriages.
Idiots...
The President of the Islamic Friendship Association of Australia, Keysar Trad, says women should be allowed to enter into a polygamous marriage if they choose to.
And, as payingattention posted above, a change in the law would surely allow a woman to have more than one husband. What does the Islamic Friendship Ass'n of Oz think of that?
In regard to gay "marriage", no doubt many Moslems would welcome its legalization, as long as the age of consent was, say, 12. So many men of the religion of peace do like their boys. And of course, they could divorce the lad when he was 16 or 17 and his beard started to grow.
Then re-marry, to a new 12-year-old, naturally.
None just yet!
Hugh Hefner versus Mormon Polygamists of FLDS
Besides, if two men who share sexual proclivities can get the various and sundry states to "not discriminate against their love" how long before polygamy gets a toe-hold? How can we "discriminate" against their practice of religion?
Polygamy is ALREADY here in the US (Come to Ohio, I will introduce you to some Somalis and their "sisters")... The question is, when will we have it become official?
What is in it for the women?
Do they too get The Virgins That Await Every Good Suicide Bomber...?
If so, one would suspect it is lesbianism which leads these gals to go out with a bang!