Morning Star

Oil and Water

 

The YouTube video above is remarkable for its distillation of the fundamental problem between pious Muslims and nonMuslims. The former will not respect any authority other than the Qur'an and shari'a law, and thus all ordinances (outside the Umma) which contravene those dictates are deeply resented. While Christians and Jews (and most other religions in the West) also prioritise their own precepts, those precepts don't usually contradict the local secular authority, because most constitutions are derived from natural law. (In the US, the exception since 1973, of course, has been abortion and now the wider HHS mandate which will force many to undermine their consciences).

What is also remarkable about the video is that it makes no apologia for child marriages, other than that they are allowed by the Qur'an. Not only allowed, but encouraged by those who wish to imitate Muhammed. Thus, what they find completely natural--an older man marrying a painted child--is repugnant to those who see marriage as a contract freely entered by consenting adults.

There is no arguing with Muslims on this point, for it is not a question of reason, natural law, human rights or dignity of children. It is simply a matter of deferring to the private revelation of a man, who insisted that Allah told him he could marry as many women as he wished (which for him included a nine-year-0ld girl) and that his followers could each have as many as four. Now, they bluntly insist that wherever they live, they should be allowed to live according to these rules, no matter what the local authorities have decreed.

It is an honest shot across the bow (rather than the surrepticious importing of "cousins" and "sisters" who will live in polygamous arrangments behind closed doors) and needs to be discussed in the same forthright manner. It is also an opportunity for those in the West to search their hearts (and their legal codes) to determine what statutes will be enforced and what will be up for grabs. Furthermore, for those who are watching the battle over the [re]definition of marriage, please be aware that any efforts to destabilise that institution will mean that the entire process will weaken our defenses against polygamy when that challenge arises.

Marriage: cultural chaos

When Christian marriage is denigrated, everything becomes possible. At one time, Judeo-Christian societies held that sexual intimacy should be reserved for couples who entered an exclusive sacramental covenant. Promiscuity was frowned upon, adultery was considered a sin and children out-of-wedlock were shunned as a means of discouraging infidelity. Bit by bit over the last century, each of these beliefs crumbled, and promiscuity eventually became so commonplace that marriage was simply one transient lifestyle among many. Therefore, this news item out of Great Britain is both unsurprising and yet curious:

A leaked government document by an integration and tolerance working group said polygamous marriages may be registered by authorities to protect women whose partners take a second or third wife.

The Government strongly denied it would make the practice of having more than one wife legal. But it is feared the idea could end up being the first step towards recognising multiple marriages under Islamic Sharia law, which allows a man four wives.

Tory MP Philip Hollobone said: “The public will not support the recognition of polygamous marriages. Any step along that road would be a step too far.”

A Communities and Local Government spokesman said: “Polygamy is illegal and will remain so.”

Certainly, traditional marriage advocates should defend the institution from polygamists, but there's so much work to be done to shore up the foundations of marriage. Projections showed that babies born out-of-wedlock in England would outnumber those born to married couples by 2012, and this takes into account couples who cohabitate as well as girls who simply become pregnant without cohabitating. Clearly, stable marriages are not longer the norm for raising children, nor are fathers considered necessary for their proper upbringing.

In this sense, it's difficult to claim that marriage is sacrosanct, when most people see it as anachronistic. It will take much prayer and hard work to reevangelise these post-Christian regions before permanent damage is done to the legal codes.

ADDENDUM: Australia is already dealing with "legislative pluralism" in recognising polygamous unions of immigrant from primarily Muslim nations.

[L]atest research has found that while polygamy is unlawful, mainstream law accommodates men who arrive in Australia with multiple wives and gives some legal standing to multiple partnerships that originate in Australia.

Andrew Bostom, in that piece, also cites the fatwa that explains the "need" for polygamy:

Fatwa 2134 Dr. Main Khalid Al-Qudah  Date 2006-10-27

Polygamy in Islam is permissible for different reasons, like:

1- The sexual energy of men is more than that of women in general. So, in some cases, one wife is not enough to fulfill the conjugal desire of her husband

2- Pregnancy and delivery negatively affect the shape and physical attraction that women have.

3- World wide, the percentage of females is always more than that of males, eventually, there must be a solution, either to permit adultery and prostitution, or to allow polygamy

4- One husband could take care of more than one wife at the same time; socially, financially, and even sexually as I mentioned above. However, the opposite is not right because of the physical and psychological capability that Allah the all mighty gave men.

It's easy to conclude that men's sexual needs are a driving factor, that women aren't equal partners but persons who need to be "taken care of," and that complementarity is an alien concept in Islam.