12-year-old Saudi girl in divorce battle with 80-year-old husband, page 2

reply to post by getreadyalready

---

An 80 year old "buying" his marriage to his 12 year old cousin and then "consummating" it?

If you condone that by way of not chastising or judging it, then you are no better than he is IMO.

And then you try to justify it by comparing it to a 100+ year old practice here in the U.S.? Do you know what comparing apples to oranges means? Obviously not.

What REALLY blows my mind is that you say you work in a field that gives you experience and knowlege in this area and you STILL think there is nothing wrong with it. I feel sorry for the young girls in your case files, I really do.

You also seemed to overlook the fact that the childs mother and the child herself didn't approve of this marriage. But I guess that doesn't matter does it? As long as the old perv is happy who are YOU to judge, right?



Peace

reply to post by Taupin Desciple

---

I said, that if it is not my wife, sister, or daughter, then I don't have a right to judge. It is not my culture, my country, my family, or my religion, so I have absolutely zero knowledge of whether or not it is appropriate.

In addition, I gave the example of 12 to 80 being fairly obviously wrong, and yet legal in some cases, and 17 and 18 being fairly obviously right, yet still illegal even in the US!

In one state, (Mississippi for example), you can have an 18 year old sentenced as a sex offender and forced to register with law enforcement for life because he had sex with his 17 year old girlfriend, and in the same town at the same time a parent can give consent for a 16 year old to marry a 50 year old with no repercussions?

If we can't decide for ourselves what is right and wrong, then how can we presume to decide for people thousands of miles away in entirely different cultures?

I admit that I would not allow my daughter to do this, but what do I know? Really . . . . think about it. If I lived in poverty, and my family was starving, and there was a good chance of my daughter starving or winding up in slavery or prostitution anyway, and an opportunity came along to pull my family out of its situation, provide for my daughter, and put her into a situation where she was obviously being exploited, but at least it was only by one man and according to accepted religious doctrines that would allow her entrance to heaven, and set her up as the matriarch of a new more successful family, then I can't say I wouldn't take that opportunity.

Would you refuse something lawful and religiously accepted that would help your family, just because some outsiders viewpoint tried to convince you it was morally wrong?

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by Taupin Desciple

---

I said, that if it is not my wife, sister, or daughter, then I don't have a right to judge. It is not my culture, my country, my family, or my religion, so I have absolutely zero knowledge of whether or not it is appropriate.

How can you NOT know that it is innapropriate for an 80 year old to bone a 12 year old? A 12 year old child is a 12 year old child regardless of their culture, country, family or religion. If you honestly don't know that yet, I strongly urge you to get out of the southeast and learn about people.

In addition, I gave the example of 12 to 80 being fairly obviously wrong, and yet legal in some cases, and 17 and 18 being fairly obviously right, yet still illegal even in the US!

WHAT'S YOUR POINT???? That because our politicians make and hold onto contadictory laws we, the people, aren't able to know what is morally right and what is not? What color is the sky in your world?

In one state, (Mississippi for example), you can have an 18 year old sentenced as a sex offender and forced to register with law enforcement for life because he had sex with his 17 year old girlfriend, and in the same town at the same time a parent can give consent for a 16 year old to marry a 50 year old with no repercussions?


If we can't decide for ourselves what is right and wrong, then how can we presume to decide for people thousands of miles away in entirely different cultures?

It sounds to me that YOU can't decide what's right or wrong because you are so engulfed in the backwards and outdated laws of where you live.

I admit that I would not allow my daughter to do this, but what do I know? Really . . . . think about it. If I lived in poverty, and my family was starving, and there was a good chance of my daughter starving or winding up in slavery or prostitution anyway, and an opportunity came along to pull my family out of its situation, provide for my daughter, and put her into a situation where she was obviously being exploited, but at least it was only by one man and according to accepted religious doctrines that would allow her entrance to heaven, and set her up as the matriarch of a new more successful family, then I can't say I wouldn't take that opportunity.

It sounds to that you don't wish to pass judgement here because you don't know what's right for your own child. [Your words, not mine]
And poverty? I don't have to think about, I lived it. When I was 14 my mother moved me and my 2 brothers to the Ozarks in southern Missouri. For the first year we didn't have electricity and we never had running water or gas. There were many nights when I went to bed cold and hungry. My mother and older brother did the best they could for 5 years, but it never got much better. But at least we tried for the sake of self-suffiency and a better life. We toughed it out. We never took the easy way out. Looking back, I'm glad that I had that experience in my life because it helped shape me into the man I am today. I learned that hard work pays off and that which doesn't kill you only makes you stronger. Seems to me that if you were faced with the same situation you would have quickly, and without regret, prostituted your own daughter to the highest bidder for an easy way out. I feel pity for you and feel sorry for your daughter.


Would you refuse something lawful and religiously accepted that would help your family, just because some outsiders viewpoint tried to convince you it was morally wrong?

No. I would refuse something lawful and religously accepted that would help my family if I knew it were MORALLY wrong. I don't need to compare myself to other people to know what I'm about.



Peace

reply to post by Taupin Desciple

---

No. I would refuse something lawful and religously accepted that would help my family if I knew it were MORALLY wrong. I don't need to compare myself to other people to know what I'm about.

That is a good answer and I agree.

But, if your culture and your laws and your religion and your ancestors and parents all tell you something is morally acceptable, then how are you to know it is wrong?

reply to post by Subjective Truth

---

The Muslim faith is not that much different than the Christian faith. The difference is that they have the discipline to adhere to their faith and ignore political correctness.

Don't get me wrong, I am a religious man, but if I read the Bible, and I adhere strictly to its teachings, I would be an extremist just like the Muslims that we see in the press.

In general, most Muslims are moderate just like most Christians are moderate, but the extremists get all the press. The worst part is that the extremists are probably the most accurate and correct in following their religions. The rest of us follow a watered-down politically correct version of our religion.

In the end, religion will be kind of like SouthPark's version of race in their "gooback" episode. We will all be a uniform perfectly blended world religion that is acceptable to all people in all cultures and has no real value at all.

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by Taupin Desciple

---

No. I would refuse something lawful and religously accepted that would help my family if I knew it were MORALLY wrong. I don't need to compare myself to other people to know what I'm about.

That is a good answer and I agree.

But, if your culture and your laws and your religion and your ancestors and parents all tell you something is morally acceptable, then how are you to know it is wrong?

Because I have my own mind. I have my OWN moral compass. I am not their robot. Granted, when you're a child you are not capable of thinking for yourself and it's your parents' responsibility to guide you in the direction of what they think is best for you. And if that direction is paralell to their laws, religion, and ancectors, then so be it. But when you get to an age where outside influences, well, influence you, then you are able to draw your own conclusions based on that and how you were raised.

The mother AND daughter in this situation both didn't want the marriage to take place. From that, I can judge for myself that the marriage was wrong simply because the daughter didn't want to be the bride.

To say that what that 80 year old man did was either morally right or simply NOT WRONG simply because of their culture or our lack of understanding of their culture, is to be morally bankrupt IMO.



Peace

reply to post by Taupin Desciple

---

OK. So what is the line and who gets to decide?

Was the 17 and 18 year old example I gave wrong? Because it is a true case and the 18 year old is a registered sex offender and even though they are both in their 20's now, the court continues to renew a restraining order to keep them apart?

What about 80 and 50, or 50 and 20, or 18 and 16 or 16 and 17? Does it matter which sex is older and which is younger? Is a 40 year old man and a 20 year old woman different than a 40 year old woman and a 20 year old man? What if the Woman was 80 and the Man was 20, 30, 40?

It is very easy to condemn 12 and 80, but it is a slippery slope, so you have to be willing to put your a** on the line and decide what is "morally right" in your opinion. It is not enough to sit on the side lines and point out the obvious wrongs, you have to be able to draw a line somewhere, and that is not easy!

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by Taupin Desciple

---

OK. So what is the line and who gets to decide?

Was the 17 and 18 year old example I gave wrong? Because it is a true case and the 18 year old is a registered sex offender and even though they are both in their 20's now, the court continues to renew a restraining order to keep them apart?

What about 80 and 50, or 50 and 20, or 18 and 16 or 16 and 17? Does it matter which sex is older and which is younger? Is a 40 year old man and a 20 year old woman different than a 40 year old woman and a 20 year old man? What if the Woman was 80 and the Man was 20, 30, 40?

It is very easy to condemn 12 and 80, but it is a slippery slope, so you have to be willing to put your a** on the line and decide what is "morally right" in your opinion. It is not enough to sit on the side lines and point out the obvious wrongs, you have to be able to draw a line somewhere, and that is not easy!

What is the line? When the bride to be AND her mother both object to the wedding!!! Don't THEY get a say in this? You seem to be sidestepping this mud puddle at all costs.

This may be a slippery slope to you, but I'm standing on solid ground here. Morality is not subjective IMO. Morality is not percieved or attained by outside influences. Morality is not determined by local laws. Every human being on this planet is essentially the same in that we are all born with a 'moral compass". We are all born with the ability to see the difference between right and wrong. And don't give me that "different culture" crap. Even aboriginies know it's wrong to murder for no good reason.

Every age difference that you use for your argument signifies a person who is mature enough to make their own decisions. If a 17 year old and an 18 year are in love and want to marry, more power to them. There's nothing wrong with that. They're both old enough to make up their own minds. Morality comes into play here because the marraige in consensual, they love each other, and they are both old enough to make up their own minds. You can insert your own age differences at this point.

What gets me is, you keep saying saying how the laws are flawed, but you use them as a moral yardstick of sorts. As if that's all you have to go by when tryin to determine what is right or wrong.



Peace

reply to post by Taupin Desciple

---

Every age difference that you use for your argument signifies a person who is mature enough to make their own decisions. If a 17 year old and an 18 year are in love and want to marry, more power to them. There's nothing wrong with that. They're both old enough to make up their own minds. Morality comes into play here because the marraige in consensual, they love each other, and they are both old enough to make up their own minds. You can insert your own age differences at this point.

You are right, I guess I was making two different arguments, and I think we agree on one of them.

1. The law is flawed and should NOT be used a a moral yardstick.

-->The law in that Culture allowed this marriage, while the law in the US prosecuted the 18 year old and basically ruined his life for wanting to marry the 17 year old?

1.a. Most people who condemn Muslims, or other cultures/countries/religions do so from an elitist view point that their country/culture/religion is superior, and I was trying to point out the falsehood of that notion. Our "Western" way is not superior, it is equally flawed, and equally harmful.

2. The people involved should have the final say, and in this case the mother and her daughter should have the final say, and it should never have happened. However, what if the mother and daughter had agreed to it. It would still seem morally wrong from a Western perspective. Would you still argue the same way if all parties were in agreement?

3. We still didn't determine the "appropriate" age for marriage. Biology says 12 or 13 or younger in many cases is appropriate for reproduction. No matter how "civilized" we become, we can't change the biology aspect.

Parent's can consent to a young child getting married to an older man. It can be perfectly legal. Unfortunately, it can also become illegal at the discretion of any over-zealous prosecutor.

It is conceivable (and has happened) in the U.S. that a 13 year old could legally marry a 17 year old, and she could become pregnant, and all parties (including biology) could consent, and then some "moral barometer" of a prosecutor could decide to put the now 18 year old in jail, force the couple apart, force the father to never see his bride or baby again?

How can that be morally right?
In one case, an 18 year old could be taking advantage of a 14 year old, and would deserve prison, but in another case you are breaking up a happy family?

I don't want to be the one deciding which case is which!! And I don't think any unaffiliated person or law should be allowed to make that decision. That is my main argument.

[edit on 10-2-2010 by getreadyalready]

reply to post by getreadyalready

---

To allow an eight year old to marry and have sex because "your family needs money", has a name too.

It's called prostitution. It's pimping your own child.

There are some things we don't have to wonder about. Most of us just know it is inherently wrong, whether or not it is practiced by another culture or religion. This is one of them.

It's perplexing that anyone could claim they are "clueless" about whether or not this is acceptable behavior from this, or any other culture or religion.

These old men who desire to marry and have sex with children are pedophiles. It's a mental illness. A sexual disorder. You can put sugar on it, and tie bows on it, and spray it with perfume. Try to make it smell good and look good. But it's still a pile of.....excrement. Always was, always will be. A big ugly pile.

If you are still confused................then it's really kinda scary.

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by Taupin Desciple

---

Every age difference that you use for your argument signifies a person who is mature enough to make their own decisions. If a 17 year old and an 18 year are in love and want to marry, more power to them. There's nothing wrong with that. They're both old enough to make up their own minds. Morality comes into play here because the marraige in consensual, they love each other, and they are both old enough to make up their own minds. You can insert your own age differences at this point.

You are right, I guess I was making two different arguments, and I think we agree on one of them.

1. The law is flawed and should NOT be used a a moral yardstick.

-->The law in that Culture allowed this marriage, while the law in the US prosecuted the 18 year old and basically ruined his life for wanting to marry the 17 year old?

1.a. Most people who condemn Muslims, or other cultures/countries/religions do so from an elitist view point that their country/culture/religion is superior, and I was trying to point out the falsehood of that notion. Our "Western" way is not superior, it is equally flawed, and equally harmful.

2. The people involved should have the final say, and in this case the mother and her daughter should have the final say, and it should never have happened. However, what if the mother and daughter had agreed to it. It would still seem morally wrong from a Western perspective. Would you still argue the same way if all parties were in agreement?

3. We still didn't determine the "appropriate" age for marriage. Biology says 12 or 13 or younger in many cases is appropriate for reproduction. No matter how "civilized" we become, we can't change the biology aspect.

Parent's can consent to a young child getting married to an older man. It can be perfectly legal. Unfortunately, it can also become illegal at the discretion of any over-zealous prosecutor.

It is conceivable (and has happened) in the U.S. that a 13 year old could legally marry a 17 year old, and she could become pregnant, and all parties (including biology) could consent, and then some "moral barometer" of a prosecutor could decide to put the now 18 year old in jail, force the couple apart, force the father to never see his bride or baby again?

How can that be morally right?
In one case, an 18 year old could be taking advantage of a 14 year old, and would deserve prison, but in another case you are breaking up a happy family?

I don't want to be the one deciding which case is which!! And I don't think any unaffiliated person or law should be allowed to make that decision. That is my main argument.

[edit on 10-2-2010 by getreadyalready]

Yes, we do agree on the law part.

And yes, we do agree on the second part of the argument. I do not "blanket judge" cultures or countries. But when I see something wrong of this magnitude, I have to say something. I have no illusions that myself or my country are the elite of the world.

What is the "apprpriate" age for marriage? That's up to both parties and their immediate families. If a 12 year old girl has enough of a mind about her to where she can decide for herself that she loves an 80 year old man and wants to marry him and have children with him, intstead of going to school, playing hopscotch with her friends and giggling about boys, then it's morally right. For THEM. Not their culture or laws, but for THEM.

I have a 21 year old daughter and a 10 year old daughter. It is morally right for me to tell my 10 year old how to live her life because she doesn't know enough about life yet to decide for herself. It is NOT morally right fo me to tell my 21 year old the same things because at that point, I'd be pushing my own agenda down her throat.

Peace

reply to post by Bunken Drum

---

You make some interesting points, and I am certain that the usual "dowry" is something that is paid by the bride's family, although I am not certain how this holds true in this situation. That was an old European custom. It was moreless considered a gift to the new couple, although of course in those days, the men were financially responsible, so essentially the money did go to him. For the benefit of the marriage.

People continually compare current middle eastern values/struggles/problems to early U.S. Once upon a time, the U.S. was a young and struggling nation, trying to get it's footing in determining who we would be. We've come a long way in the short time we've been here.

The middle East is one of the oldest civilizations on earth. One would think by now their struggles in who they will be, would be at least semi-resolved. Again, we cannot continue to internalize their problems, and accept responsibility for their social issues. Political issues, some responsiblity, perhaps. But not this type thing.

We certainly didn't have anything to do with this, and there is no just parallel between this situation and the American Suffrage movement whatsoever.

That was simply women fighting for the right to vote. This is about a barbaric, brutish custom which endorses the sexual abuse and exploitation of children.

Russian scientists reach buried Antarctic Lake Vostok
  Posted 7 days ago with 83 member flags

BREAKING: Israel teams with terror group to kill Iran\'s nuclear scientists, U.S. officials tell NBC
  Posted 4 days ago with 74 member flags

Renowned Geophysicist Says Strange Sky Sounds Are Real
  Posted 2 days ago with 74 member flags

Monsanto quits as GM results announced (EUROPE)
  Posted 8 days ago with 72 member flags

FDA\'s New Claim: "Your Body Is a Drug—and We Have the Authority to Regulate It"
  Posted 11 days ago with 53 member flags

Ayatollah: Kill all Jews, annihilate Israel
  Posted 7 days ago with 49 member flags

Bill Gates Backs Climate Scientists Lobbying For Large-Scale Geoengineering
  Posted 7 days ago with 41 member flags

Is it morally wrong to take a life? Not really, say bioethicists
  Posted 14 days ago with 37 member flags

Newest topics, updated in real-time:

Newest topics getting flags, in real-time:

Newest topics getting replies, in real-time: