It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Saudi Court Approves Pedophilia

page: 6
17
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 13 2009 @ 11:09 AM
link   
reply to post by masonwatcher
 


Here's the difference though...

Those aren't Islamic Child Brides... they are Hindu Child Brides....


For whatever that's worth




posted on Apr, 13 2009 @ 11:16 AM
link   
reply to post by The All Seeing I
 


This culture makes me want to puke. The treatment of women and children is ridiculous. Stop buying oil in the ME. Make these sickos herd goats in the desert. Even though the price of oil has dropped there still needs to be an outcry to return some production in the USA and the search for alternatives like the Honda FCX.



posted on Apr, 13 2009 @ 11:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by grover
Many many cultures have allowed such marriages... indeed they were up until the past century with its longer life spans traditional even here in the west with the understanding that sexual relations were not to begin until the girl reached puberty...

... it is not... I repeat not the same as pedophilla... which is specifically sexual relations with underage minors and children.


Sorry for the long quote but the entire quote is relevant and needs to be repeted and not just have the reply code, puberty can start very early and usually starts at the age of 11.

THIS is pedophilia. I am really trying not to get a T&C warning for what I want to say. You cannot slice this any other way. this is state sponsored pedophilia. You think anything is going to restrain this creep? You think the little one will be able to legitimately complain about this. You think if he does comply what happens when she has her first cycle? What if she has it a tad early and starts like now?

Think before you post. What you just posted will stay on the Internet for many years for anyone to read. You excused Pedophilia. No doubt about it.



posted on Apr, 13 2009 @ 11:26 AM
link   

As a medical diagnosis, it is defined as a psychological disorder in which an adult experiences a sexual preference for prepubescent children.[1][2][3] According to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), pedophilia is specified as a form of paraphilia in which a person either has acted on intense sexual urges towards children, or experiences recurrent sexual urges towards and fantasies about children that cause distress or interpersonal difficulty....In strictly behavioral contexts, the word "pedophilia" has been used to refer to child sexual abuse itself, also called "pedophilic behavior".
wiki link

Okay, first off while I do not think of this marriage as healthy or right in terms of this child's rights or well-being as a human-being, I do not see the 'pedophilia' connection, as Grover has already pointed out.

She was allowed to be married BUT as the article says the husband was NOT allowed to have sex with her.

While I find the idea of children being forced to marry, for any reason, abhorrent, that is undoubtedly a product of the culture I was raised in.

I have many issues with countries such as SA and the way they treat women and children; however, I think it is important to try to approach these topics with as little ethnocentricity as possible.

Child marriage, arranged marriages and the like a products of culture, which vary throughout the world. While this is NOT a statement made in attempt to justify this marriage, it is an attempt to make people see the differences between cultural norms and of course the poor use of the term 'pedophilia' in this context.

To me this is more about enticing hate and division between the west and the east more than anything else, it is all part of the information-crusades of the 21st century.

[edit on 13-4-2009 by Animal]



posted on Apr, 13 2009 @ 11:28 AM
link   
reply to post by on_yur_6
 



Even though the price of oil has dropped there still needs to be an outcry to return some production in the USA and the search for alternatives like the Honda FCX.


Perhaps you'd like to take that issue up with all the ExxonMobil, Texaco, Halliburton and Saudi ARAMCO lackeys in the Senate and Congress?

Ask them to kindly desist in passing motions of support and increased intake of Saudi crude into the US, so they can watch their respective share prices soar.

See how many take to your views favourably. Don't blame the Saudis, they haven't got a gun to your head, but the Oil Industry does.



posted on Apr, 13 2009 @ 11:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by The Godfather of Conspira
reply to post by on_yur_6
 



Even though the price of oil has dropped there still needs to be an outcry to return some production in the USA and the search for alternatives like the Honda FCX.


Perhaps you'd like to take that issue up with all the ExxonMobil, Texaco, Halliburton and Saudi ARAMCO lackeys in the Senate and Congress?

Ask them to kindly desist in passing motions of support and increased intake of Saudi crude into the US, so they can watch their respective share prices soar.

See how many take to your views favourably. Don't blame the Saudis, they haven't got a gun to your head, but the Oil Industry does.


Toss them all out and start over! We need term limits now but unfortunately the Congress has to vote and approve that. They won't give up their gravy train unless they are voted out. As long as most Americans are ignorant of what is going on they will rob us of everything they can.



posted on Apr, 13 2009 @ 11:35 AM
link   
It was not my intention to boast on some righteous higher ground and smear the islamic faith but instead to expose those who's intentions are to do so.

It is essential to note the web that we weave with others, especially with those whom we go to great lengths out of our way for... this issue/newsbit pulls the curtain open far enough for us to see that something again doesn't add up to what we have been sold:

A bulk of 911 evidence leads to Saudi Arabia,
but somehow they are magically exempt
We attack afganistan (heroin), iraq (oil & threat to dollar & to Saudi Arabia) and bully iran (oil & threat to dollar) instead

Saudi Arabia financially supports the palestinian resistance (whom we fondly call terrorists)
but again they are exempt
iraq and iran are fingered as the sole benefactors

Saudi government endorses beheadings and pedophiles
but again they are exempt
iraq and iran are fingered for their human rights violations

The world community over and over again presents a long list of Israel's human rights violations to the UN... over and over again the US, with their security council member veto, renders the UN impotent to take action.

The Israelis/Palestinian conflict is made and maintained by the US & Saudi playing tag team in the shadows. While we all have our attention focused away from the puppet masters.

With this conflict in full perpetual bloom our military industrial complex, corporate oil interests, financial enterprises and drug barons... have full access/permission to make bank i.e. our congress has hand several plank checks over to our military and financial institutions, who in turn have given direct and indirect aid to our new oil and drug ventures in the middle east.

The bottom line is not a matter of perspective...
the reality is undeniable...
the bottom line is profits over people...
record breaking profits for the elitists who own and run our country, who make a successful stellar effort in convincing most of us otherwise.



posted on Apr, 13 2009 @ 11:36 AM
link   
reply to post by Animal
 


I have to stop replying to this thread but please deny ignorance,

No sex until PUBERTY. That can begin any time. She can reach puberty tomorrow. This is a loophole, girls can reach puberty at a very early age. Puberty on average lasts between 11 and 22. It can also start much much earlier.

So just because she reaches puberty you think that's fine? Is it fine if she is 7, 8, 9,10, 11? We are talking about a child getting married for nothing more than sex. They are not defining sex like we do its all about intercourse, so he has free reign for anything he wants until she has her period and then all bets are off. She can reach puberty right now at the age of 8.

This is my last post in this thread it doesn't seem to be sinking in.



posted on Apr, 13 2009 @ 11:52 AM
link   
What we may be over looking here is the price placed on Virginity. If you gain the rights to the child then you have a guarantee when she "becomes a woman". I don't understand the appeal myself to be the first on entry but apparently there are plenty of men around the world who find it priceless. Case in point: Student Auctions off Virginity for $3.7million+



posted on Apr, 13 2009 @ 11:58 AM
link   
I think this discussion should focus more on activities and laws enforced today. References to writings and laws from the very distant past can be misleading.

Every culture has a few skeletons in their closets. Here in Canada there was a law still on the books in Quebec into the 1980s that allowed boys as young as 14 and girls as young as 12 to be married. A vestige from the French colonial days when the Catholic Church determined these matters. Probably not enforced for a century as the country had it's own overriding legal system which I think made those limits 18 for boys 16 for girls.

Saudi Arabia is an unusual place. In 1932 the ruling al-Saud family came to power and maintains it at the behest of the fundamentalist Wahhabist form of Sunni Islam.

Slavery was still legal in the Kingdom well into the 20th Century until they bowed to international pressure in 1961. Many have observed this is still practiced but under legal guise. The human rights abuses in Saudi Arabia are appalling, but because of their critical role economically, the UN and the US give them a free pass,

The Saud family itself is internally divided on many issues. The present King is actually an advocate of more modernism culturally and in religious matters.

Unfortunate for it's citizenry, the county is caught in a time warp with it's strict interpretation and enforcement of fundamentalist Islamic law.


Mike






[edit on 13-4-2009 by mmiichael]



posted on Apr, 13 2009 @ 12:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Animal


Okay, first off while I do not think of this marriage as healthy or right in terms of this child's rights or well-being as a human-being, I do not see the 'pedophilia' connection, as Grover has already pointed out.

She was allowed to be married BUT as the article says the husband was NOT allowed to have sex with her.



[edit on 13-4-2009 by Animal]


WHO is stopping him from having sex with her? They treat women like property. They cannot complain or seek redress from the courts. I just want to know what government agency is monitoring these creeps 24/7 to keep them off the children.



posted on Apr, 13 2009 @ 12:35 PM
link   
reply to post by boaby_phet
 


You may want to read the article again and pay particular attention to this information.


Quran 65.4: "A man can marry a girl younger than nine years of age, even if the girl is still a baby being breastfed. A man, however is prohibited from having intercourse with a girl younger than nine, other sexual acts such as foreplay, rubbing, kissing and sodomy is allowed. A man having intercourse with a girl younger than nine years of age has not committed a crime, but only an infraction, if the girl is not permanently damaged. If the girl, however, is permanently damaged, the man must provide for her all her life. But this girl will not count as one of the man's four permanent wives. He also is not permitted to marry the girl's sister."

If this information is true even though he signed a pledge not to have sex with her, he has alternate ways of obtaining his sick sexual gratification. And yes they are approving pedophilia, everything that is allowed is of a sexual nature, he is going to be allowed to forcibly perform sexual acts against this child.

They have left no opening for her. They said that she may apply for a divorce (not leave) when she reaches puberty, but he may also have sex with her when she reaches puberty, do you really think he's going to wait until the court makes a decision on the divorce request before he forces himself on this child ? Do you really think he will wait until she reaches puberty to force himself on her, he accepted her as payment of a debt for cripes sake ?! Her parents can use this time to educate her??? Did you miss the part where it said that it was HER FATHER that used her to pay off a debt ? And the courts have already said that her mother has no say in the matter as she is seperated from the father and has no parental rights to her daughter, the one parent that wants to help her is not being allowed to do so.


Both of these men are poor excuses for human beings, i don't care what their culture is, a human being (especially an 8 year old child) is not to be used to pay off a debt. This story infuriates me and breaks my heart, she is a baby for God's sake with no one to help her



posted on Apr, 13 2009 @ 12:42 PM
link   
reply to post by LoneGunMan
 


Hardly.

No one could ever accuse me of supporting pedophilla. What I am doing is pointing out the historical context of child marriages... and there is plenty of historical precedent for it... does it make it relevant in today's world? I don't personally think so but I am not about to try and impose my world view on another culture's take on such things.

I know better.

If this man's intent to to abuse this child it doesn't matter if it is adopted or married or hanging out at the mall... in fact if his intent is to abuse the child them legally even in the context of Saudi law he is putting himself in jeopordy because the girl's family legally has rights regarding her...

ALSO in context of traditional child marriages it is often the case that the marriage itself is a formality and the child continues to live with the parents until of age... is there anything to prove that he has taken possession of the girl?



posted on Apr, 13 2009 @ 12:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Godfather of Conspira
reply to post by Hemisphere
 



If the Khomeini quote posted by the OP is factual then there is no need for anyone here to smear Islam as it does a fine job on it's own.


You do realise Ayatollah Khomeini is long dead and since him, Iran has a had a series of progressively reformist leaders enter Office, the one exception being Ahmadinejad.


would make you think it is not going on in the Muslim world where it is permitted by their faith?


Correction: SAUDI ARABIA. Not the entire Muslim world.

This kind of literalist, strict interpretation of Islam is only happening in Wahhabist Saudi Arabia.

Every other Muslim state, save for Iran, has minimum ages for marriage ranging from 16-19 years of age just like the Western world.


What is their term for female circumcision? We call it suppresive mutilation they call it "Khitan".


Once again another uninformed opinion.

Female circumcision is an exclusively African practice (by both Muslims and non-Muslims in Sub-Saharan Africa). No Middle Eastern, Arab states have any reported occurrences of this.

It's about as foreign to them as it is to us in the West.

[edit on 13/4/09 by The Godfather of Conspira]


I stand corrected Godfather. That said, the door remains open for these widely varying interpretations of Islam. Insiders that speak out are silenced or hounded as in the cases of Salman Rushdie and Ayaan Hirsi Ali. Repression of women and children exists and is accepted to a degree we should find repulsive. We can either speak out or stand back and wait hundreds of years for them to catch up. If we remain silent with this knowledge don't we share the blame for the suffering? That in a relatively free (for the time being) nation of over 300 million that a few select instances of pre-Industrial Era marital practices still exist does not condemn us all to silence on these issues. What would childhood be without forced sodomy? I for one expressed my repulsion at the pedophile activity and cover-up within the Catholic Church by leaving the church. Here was a society, the Catholic Church, that accepted this suppressive behavior as evidenced by the decades long cover-up and only changed course due to modern opposition to their authority. I would not have thought it acceptable behavior if the priestly sodomy was approved of by the families of the victims, even if it paid their family debts or assured them a place in paradise. If we can't share an enlightened attitude on human relations with the world what else is worth sharing?

This is a cluttered, many tentacled problem to wrestle with and yet it comes down to right and wrong. That I drive a car that runs on petroleum perhaps bought from the Saudis does not dictate that I need be silent on this issue. Cars were running on oil a long time before the Saudis were selling theirs. The Saudis didn't know they had oil until the 30's. That there are still a minority of people in my own country that continue to live by colonial mores does not dictate that I need be silent on this issue. The best chance of the underlying complexities of this issue seeing the light of day is to shine the light on the surface. Let there be light.



posted on Apr, 13 2009 @ 12:49 PM
link   
I just checked the source and has anyone noticed that the blog in question is a Jewish one with a highly negative attitude towards Islam?

besides that nowhere in the article does it say the man in question has actually taken possession of the child.



posted on Apr, 13 2009 @ 12:56 PM
link   
reply to post by grover
 


How exactly is it any different from pedophilia ? Are you saying that he is not a pedophile because he married her ? She is still a child, and he will be forcing sexual acts upon her, she can not consent, she has no rights at all.

Just because it has been allowed does not make it right. And what has puberty got to do with it ? She may enter into puberty at the age of 9 or 10, does that mean that she will be ready for sex at that young age ? Her poor excuse for a father has no right to use her to pay off his debt, she is not his possesion, she is a human being, a little girl who has a right to have a childhood without a sick, deranged, perverted piece of scum raping her !



posted on Apr, 13 2009 @ 01:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by chise61
reply to post by boaby_phet
 


You may want to read the article again and pay particular attention to this information.


Quran 65.4: "A man can marry a girl younger than nine years of age, even if the girl is still a baby being breastfed. A man, however is prohibited from having intercourse with a girl younger than nine, other sexual acts such as foreplay, rubbing, kissing and sodomy is allowed. A man having intercourse with a girl younger than nine years of age has not committed a crime, but only an infraction, if the girl is not permanently damaged. If the girl, however, is permanently damaged, the man must provide for her all her life. But this girl will not count as one of the man's four permanent wives. He also is not permitted to marry the girl's sister."

If this information is true even though he signed a pledge not to have sex with her, he has alternate ways of obtaining his sick sexual gratification. And yes they are approving pedophilia, everything that is allowed is of a sexual nature, he is going to be allowed to forcibly perform sexual acts against this child.


Some of the posters in this string like playing armchair lawyer and "armchair" is an accurate description as the thoughts expressed here do nothing in the real world to either promote or stop this practice. Life is safe behind our monitors. If only Saudi women had the same opportunity to express themselves as chise61 does here.



posted on Apr, 13 2009 @ 01:04 PM
link   
Unless it comes out otherwise we have no proof one way or the other as to whether he is sexually abusing her or not...

besides that...

... the article cited never said that he has taken possession of her... just that her mother is fighting the marriage...

So... based on those two unknowns... everything else posted on this thread is entirely speculative.



posted on Apr, 13 2009 @ 01:09 PM
link   
reply to post by grover
 



I just checked the source and has anyone noticed that the blog in question is a Jewish one with a highly negative attitude towards Islam?


I'm glad someone else picked up on this


It's amazing how when you're discussing anything relating to Islam, any old, ranting from any random source will do to prove a negative point.

Even a blatantly Zionist-oriented, right-wing Jewish blog with a clear agenda against Islam that posts stories from like-minded, equally biased sources like Jihad Watch and has a picture on it's main page saying "No Barack Crap".

However if you want to criticise Israel, the US or Christianity you better have an armada of verifiable information to back yourself up otherwise no one will pay attention.



posted on Apr, 13 2009 @ 01:11 PM
link   
reply to post by The Godfather of Conspira
 


It was quite obvious even with a cursatory reading of it so I went to the CNN link as well and made my conclusions from there... I always immediately suspect any source that is so obviously biased.



new topics

top topics



 
17
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join