Michael Jackson converts to Islam

You can change your nose . . . you can carve out a new chin . . . heck, you can even tie-dye your skin . . . and top it all off with a really cool change of spiritual guidance . . . . but it really doesn't alter in the least that . . .

Michael Jackson = Nutjob

Unfortunately, you seem to have confused marriage contract with actual marriage - a marriage contract is exactly what it says, a contract for marriage at a time when the child is of marriageable age.
Unfortunately, this also means that sometimes the child may be "trained" in marriage duties (not necessarily sexual) from an early age.

If you read the link you provided, it is also dependant on the consent of the parents - which raises the rather ugly (to me) question of arranged marriages.

Also a marriage contract is not the same as the homosexual peadophilia of which Jackson was accused and "acquitted"

In many arian and arab countries,marriage contracts at a young age (which is merely a form of arranged marriage when the child becomes old enough) are an unfortunate tradition - this does not mean that the same countries are a hotbed of peadophilia.

It was very commen in Europe for hundreds of years, particularly amongst the nobility in order to cement alliances, and it wasn't too long ago that the age of consent for marriage was raised in western countries.

Many examples can be found.

Jerry lee lewis ring any bells?

[edit on 21/11/2008 by budski]

He only likes the religion because women wear veils and don't distract him from the sight of little Boys

I see a Thriller remix with a bunch of Jihadis dancing in it


"Cause This Is Allah, Allah Night
And He's Gonna Save You From The America Beast About to strike
You Know It's Allah, Allah Night
You're Fighting For Your Life Usa's A Killer, Allah"

Islam means, to submit..so i think that means giving up your name, your lifestyle, your integrity as a free man?
I dont hope mikaeeel is so desparate and does this to score some young virgins boys in a...better place.

Some lifestyle changes may be necessary, but I believe new Christians are expected to modify their lifestyle as well if they are engaging in activities that go against their new religion. Name changes are not necessary.

That's such a radical change, from Jehova's Witness to Islam!

Biiiiig jump!

Well, after hearing about the proliferation of little boy sex slavery in Dubai, I can't separate the cynic in me from the notion that 'faith' might have little to do with it.

But in the end I agree .... Can't... muster ... caring. ...

Caring glands.... not responding ...

Pfft. Mikey - you need something - hope this is it!

I'm still wondering what possible type of music he had promised to do there for the 7 million. Parts of Dubai does seem to be backwards from the Muslim religion anyway, even if it just for tourists. It's become as if the new Baylon.

No, I think he should move back there and maybe they can treat him with their own Sharia law courts if they want.

Although, it sounds as if they actually bought MJ and he's most likely going to be frozen in carbonite by a bounty hunter and brought back there to work on a prison barge for Jabba the Sheik.

This is interesting. When a pervert rapes a little girl the little girl gets stoned to death for tempting the perv. When MJ goes off on some little boys do they stone the homo-pedo and the boys or just the boys for tempting him. Since they stone homosexuals and victims I guess "everybody must get stoned"

reply to post by budski

---

Seems like the contracts were followed through...

You may think that child marriage is substantially different to the kind of paedophilia Jackson supposedly engaged in, but to me they are equally repulsive.

The Arabian region is not a hotbed of paedophilia, but they do not seem to have the same disgust for paedophiles that the West has.

And of course there are many instances in the past where arranged child marriage was practiced, but in these instances it was an arrangement between parents to marry children to each other at a later date. This is not the same as marrying a child to an old man...

No offences... but maybe he is also planning to shift to Afganistan or pakistan... and than do some good with his life... may I suggest.... become a Jehadi (sucide bomber)

reply to post by 44soulslayer

---

Sorry, but you seem to have completely ignored my post - I'll say again: It's a marriage CONTRACT which isn't the same thing at all.

Also your point about european marriages of convenience, often arranged when the bride to be was a child, were often to men many years older than them.

Your prejudice is beginning to show.....

reply to post by FlyersFan

---

That's right - he's in hot water right now. I remember a couple years ago he had to sell off the rights to the entire Beatles catalog that he owned. Just last week he sold his ranch in CA for 35 million.

reply to post by budski

---

Perhaps Im just being thick.

How is a marriage contract which is subsequently completed any better than "unsolicited" paedophilia?

The child is equally abused in both situations.


ps: Even if such arrangements were practised in other parts of the world, they currently are not. The onus of evidence is on you to prove otherwise. Your criticism that I am prejudiced is bang on in this case... I dislike the culture of Saudi Arabia vehemently.

[edit on 21-11-2008 by 44soulslayer]

reply to post by 44soulslayer

---

The contract is not fulfilled until the child is the legal age to marry - which is different in different countries, in some cases, a marriage may take place, but the child will not become sexually active with the husband until menstruation begins, however this is not at all common.

In other times during history it was quite common for a child to be pledged at a very young age and then married as young as twelve, or when she started to menstruate - this happened throughout the world and was not confined to Islamic, arab or middle eastern arian countries.

It should be noted that in the US, children as young as 13 may marry, subject to certain conditions in at least one state.
www.coolnurse.com...

The legal age of consent was not brought in in the UK until 1929.

During roman times (and this lasted into the 20th century in some countries) the legal age to marry was 12 for girls and 14 for boys - and again, this lasted until 1929 (with parental consent) in the UK.

Countries which still practice a low (by some western standards) legal age of consent are ones which are following a tradition which is thousands of years old - yet we forget that less than a century ago, 12 year olds were allowed to marry in the UK.

reply to post by budski

---

Thanks for expanding on what you meant.

The historical aspect does back up what you say, but doesn't that just prove my point that Arabia is just 100 years behind the West in terms of social welfare standards pertaining to child welfare?

The legal aspects are also interesting, but Im inclined to say they are almost moot. While it may be legal for a 70 year old man to marry a 13 year old in certain exceptional cases in the West, has this ever been seen? I have never read of such a case, perhaps you can prove me wrong. Yet in Arabia, this has happened a number of times and according to some is alarmingly common.

You almost seem to be defending the concept that contracts for marriage at a later age are acceptible. Is this your view or are you merely attempting to build an argument against my supposed bigotry?

Do you believe that child marriages fulfilling the criteria you mentioned (ie when the girl begins menstruation) are acceptable?

Is there a difference in vileness between such marriages and paedophilia?

More importantly, do you refute that Arabia as a region is more accepting of paedophilia than the West?

It depends on how you define *behind* whos to say our culture is right and theirs is wrong? Maybe a contract before marriage is a good thing,maybe its not...just depends on the culture you were brought up to embrace now doesnt it? I should also mention that children at the age we are talking about for a contract with a man before marriage are naturally able to give child birth,nature intended *children* in our eyes to give birth at that age.So again it comes down to culture.A 14year old is about the right age to give birth in natures eyes.

[edit on 21-11-2008 by Solomons]

reply to post by 44soulslayer

---

This is a bit of a fallacy prevalent throughout the west, that somehow we are morally superior because we have values that seem that way to us.

Don't forget that until the oil boom, much of the mid-east was indeed "behind" the west in some respects.
The fact that we have progressed (in our own eyes) does not mean we have - we just perceive it that way.

To condemn another society because they do not practice what we do is hypocrisy, especially if morality is applied to it - these countries you are denigrating as being "behind" us have lower crime rates and an arguably higher morality because they do not face the same social problems which western countries do, like drug addiction for instance, or alcoholism, gang cultures and a whole host of other things.

My point is that it is wrong to judge another society by our own standards, just as it is wrong for other extremists to judge our society by their standards.

And yes, I refute that the western concept of pedophilia is more acceptable in other countries.

Remember that less than a century ago we were the same, and allowed 12 year old children to marry - and yet with typical western arrogance you dismiss this, and attempt to brush it under the carpet.

They are not "behind" us, they have different rules, traditions and a different way of life, which we sneer at because in our ignorance we think that because we have greater technology we are somehow better.

One of the biggest problems in the world right now, is western nations attempting to make other people live the way we do, adopt our values and embrace our "cultures" as though we were perfect.

I'm not saying that I think marriage between a child and an adult is right, but who the hell are we to judge the way other countries should behave - we'd be much better off getting our own houses in order before pointing the finger.


[edit on 21/11/2008 by budski]

Not sure about this, though I agree with much of the sense of what you say, Budski. Any effort to "impose" a culture tends to be from commercial interests, not cultural ones. Selling Britney records is different to cultural imposition.

The effort in Iraq and Afghanistan, for example, is to impose a political system (democracy) on the country, not any religion or culture.

And yes, it's true that we used to allow marriage to 12 year olds. I don't think we brush it under the carpet particularly. But I do think where we've got to in that regard constitutes progress, don't you? Particularly for the 12 year olds in question? So is it wholly wrong to seek to spread the word elsewhere if we can? Not sure it is, you know...

With regard to the OP, though, I think you're correct. The fundamental purpose of any religion is (or ought to be) for comfort and guidance for an individual. The assumption that moving to Islam is a backward step is absurd. What's certain is the bloke clearly needs both comfort and guidance. Islam seems as likely to give him that as any other religion.

LW

[edit on 21-11-2008 by LoneWeasel]

Poor little MJ is just hiding from reality because he can no longer seek solace at his pixie dust ranch. Speaking of pixies, thought he was still hiding in Ireland while on a quest for the ever elusive leprechaun. I suppose he thought he could steal a pot of gold.

THis is nothing more than another MJ publicity ploy. He will always be in search of an identity that he never had. For a while there he was a dead ringer for Diana Ross.