blueorder – what are you going on about?
Clearly people are moving to Sudan. You are posting on a thread about a British woman moving to Sudan to teach. Clearly people are moving there. The
CIA World Fact book even says 2% of the population of Sudan are foreigners.  Did you bother to step back a moment and think before you even typed
that? Also don’t even suggest they aren’t moving their to make their lives better in some form or other, they are doing what they want with their
lives and that involved moving to Sudan. It’s not different then people from Sudan moving to the United Kingdom.
Also, being molested, by a man or women, when you are a man or a woman, when it is un-solicited is sexual assault. Legally it is defined as: “Sexual
assault is any physical contact of a sexual nature without voluntary consent.” So my statement is true, many people in the United Kingdom are
sexually assaulted and are also criminals because they have sexually assaulted someone. Furthermore, if you desire for me to pick non-Christian
Nations with a large percentage of migrants (to the nation) I can easily do that for?
You also lack a lot of historical knowledge of that period in time. By the age of 9 between 400 to 500 AD, people were being married. There are
examples of royal marriages, Kings and Queens at that age and so on and so fourth. There are tribes in Africa to this day, where by once a child is
old enough to hunt it must hunt, reguardless of it it’s 5 or 10 at that stage. Once people were capable then they were seen as being capable. They
couldn’t afford to look after children in the same way we do now.
Also if the 9 year old was deemed unable to marry him, due to being immature the Qur’an would have forbidden it. I thik you’ll find Sura 002.282
speaks about the roll of a Guardian and the fact you can’t enter someone into that sort of contract – wedding/marriage – if they are not
mentally competent. Clearly the child back then was seen as being competent enough to marry him.
Regardless of what you think is right, what is wrong, the fact remains you can’t display him harming the girl. Nor do I have to prove innocence; the
burden of proof is on the prosecution not the defence. If you can’t display how she was harmed, then there was no point in raising the fact he
married a 9 year old girl aside from to play on peoples emotions.
As for your comment about slavery, to the slave owners it was moral. That was an era where people thought they were helping the World by civilizing
the savages. I myself don’t agree with slavery, but I also won’t condemn those who took part in it because I have no idea what life was like back
then. I desire not to see it again, nor do I hope we do see such things, but what they did it isn’t for me to decide if it’s right or wrong. I’m
not moral authority and nor are you. You live your life your way and to be honest there’s one simple rule:
Don’t do physical or economic harm to anyone.
That’s the only true crime, when you break that. Everything else is a socially constructed crime and more often then not should be done in a better
way. Age of consent is a perfect example, where by if parents think their child is having sex and isn’t ready (after all they should know on both
counts) they can contact the Police. Where by the Police will be able to inform someone (social worker, etcetera) to test the child’s competence. If
they fail then the Police get involved – this makes more sense then a magic date, the same should be done for many things, drugs, alcohol, marriage,
etcetera. A magic date isn’t the answer and it is a waste of Police time – to the point – that most acts of sex with underage people aren’t
Grenade I’ll happily answer them.
1) I myself wouldn’t sleep with a 9-year-old girl; I myself see it was wrong. However that is my own judgement and based on the year 2007. I will
not say that over 1500 years ago, someone who got married to a 9 year old and had sexual intercourse with that person is in the wrong. I don’t know
that, you don’t know that, you’ve never met the girl.
2) If you so desired, you can get coal, wood, etcetera, that’s locally sourced to provide heating. Electricity I will also grant is something you
can’t control, but you can buy televisions from British companies and so on and so fourth. You can limit the amount of trading that you allow the
Government to do by also speaking to friends and using the Internet to get the word out. Blaming the Government and big business is just an excuse. If
you had such objection to it there is more you can do.
3) What we as a Western democracy do can’t be called better, worse, etcetera. It’s different; we do give more rights to women, but only in the
last 100 years. It’s so easy to forget the Women’s Liberation Movement; it’s so easy to forget rape wasn’t even a crime in this country till
the 1980’s if you were married. Yes, in the U.K. when I was alive and growing up, if you were married, you couldn’t rape your wife.
You really need to think about things. Beheading someone for being raped is wrong in my view. But is it wrong to behead a person who has raped 1000
women or a person who has murdered 50 people and continues to threaten lives in prison? Also, the Qur’an doesn’t say that a victim of rape should
be killed. Thus it’s not Islam but rather people who worship Allah and commit these acts.
To make it simple for you:
Christian writes a book. In this book he claims that rape is fine and that anyone who is raped and has a problem with it should be killed.
This doesn’t mean Christians agree with rape. It means one person does. If 1000 people agree, it doesn’t mean Christians agree.
You also overlook a few things, firstly legislation and change takes time. Many of these nations aren’t a democracy and thus it’s not the people,
well all of them, but rather a few radicals.
Also, I don’t research on goggle. I don’t even use it. I actually base it on: The Qur’an, Haralambos and Holborn and various other books. You
see, I bother to research things and well using goggle would be better then what you are doing.
You also need to read a few history books. Many Islamic Nations were the leaders in chemistry, astronomy and so on and so fourth for hundreds of
years. Furthermore not every Islamic Nation is the same, you are generalising them – for example Dubai allows alcohol to be consumed as well as
various other substances. Also the ME can’t be the centre of the World, Oil hasn’t been an important commodity for that long, furthermore you
again over-look the history of the region 50+ years ago. Many European Nations controlled it. Many of these countries aren’t even 100 years old yet
and you want to give everyone the rights we have? The rights that took over 1000 years for us to get?
Seriously – do a bit of historical research.
By the way, there are many cases of Muslims speaking out against terrorism:
Here’s an example for you:
“Attacks on civilians (Muslims or non Muslims) at any time, peace time or war time, is forbidden in Islam.”
Stated by the President of the Islamic Supreme Council of Canada and a very important Islamic figure.
The fact is, all over the internet you can find Muslims speaking out against terrorism, as far as giving the West support in Afghanistan after 9/11.
But we ruined any chance of modernizing Islam after Iraq. We need to step back and allow them to do it in their own time.
We didn't do it over night. We can't expect these nations to do the same thing. But now many Muslims feel like the West hates them. All they see is
attack after attack. Look at Iran and the recent reports about them not trying to build nuclear weapons. We've had 4 years of false intelligence on
Iran. Can you blame those people for being angry with us?
If we had a Nation, constantly calling the British immoral, filthy, that we had no right to the technology they had, you'd feel insulted. I would.
Also, there's no chance of me becoming a Muslim. Although I live in an Islamic area, I have a degree from Buckingham University and soon plan to
teach. My partner is a semi-professional dancer in nightclubs and we live a life that in many regards is against the Qur’an and its teaching.
However, we both are wise enough to know to give these people respect. Just because we don’t agree with what they do, doesn’t make them wrong. You
can’t say they are wrong, without people able to prove direct harm without a justifiable reason.
We all would like a world with peace, but you don’t even get peace in the animal kingdom. People get hurt, people get killed, and there will always
be bad people. As the saying goes; “You can’t have a society of saints” but we need to focus on the United Kingdom and the European Union not on
Sudan. This woman broke a law, according to their courts. You have to accept that because it is their legal system – it will help them support us
– if we put people in prison on awkward charges – incitement to cause terrorism.
If anything, this can be a good thing. It showed that Sudan are not a hostile Nation, they could have killed her. They didn’t. A few thousand people
protested, millions didn’t so maybe stop looking at the bad and look at the good. The courts didn’t kill her and gave her a very light sentence,
when they could have done much worse. The President was willing to pardon her when he was able to meet British Islamic members of Government.
We should be thankful she’s alive
We should respect their verdict
We should all learn from this and give people respect
Allow Islam to change in its own time. Focus on Europe and fixing the problems we have here. Many of which have nothing to do with terrorism or
members of the Islamic faith. When we are perfect, we can tell these people how to run their nation.