Update:
I have just been warned by a friend about even publishing the title of the following article from the Dr. Homa Darabi site because I have been told it is insulting to Mohammed -- so I shall remove the offending word in the title. You can look it up for yourself. We wouldn't want to call a spade a spade in Canada, now, would we? Dr. Darabi was a Muslim and an Iranian, knew life and suffered under Ayatollah Khomeini and his regime.
News Junkie Canada: 8:48 am
Mohammad The ********* on the website of the Dr. Homa Darabi Foundation which “is a nonprofit organization concerned with all violations of human rights focusing on defending the rights of women against religious, cultural and social abuse” via The Canadian.
This is an absolutely unbelievable site. Don’t miss going to it and do check all the various threads. I repeat! Don’t miss it!
How naive I am! I knew nothing of this perversion—at least, I hope it is a perversion--of one of the world’s great religions!
My Commentary:
To anyone who believes in and follows the teachings of Ayatollah Khomeini or this stuff at the above-noted link, I say, you’re too uncivilized to live in Canada. So much is simply Horrible! How could any civilized being take this stuff seriously? The West has bent too far over-–backwards, even—in accommodating people who believe in this crap! Spread the information; it must not be hidden! No wonder Muslim men are beginning to suggest Canadians have a separate set of laws to accommodate Muslims. Just check the site out!
Read on – and consider where the Liberals have been leading us and where our laws could go. The floodgates have been opened by the Liberals. The original article appeared in the Globe and Mail.
Multiple Marriage: the Next Court Challenge
Harriet the Harried Hausfrau needs help in the home. Now why didn't Christianity think of this?
The best solution may be a multiplicity of laws, says Islamic leader MOHAMED ELMASRY, to accommodate each group
[. . . .]
. . .courts cannot function in a vacuum without regard to many considerations that are extra-legal in character, including moral and political values held by society. What happens when those values are divided?
Take homosexuality, first of all. Homosexual acts are considered immoral according to the teachings of most world religions. This does not mean that homosexuality is not practised.
[. . . .]
Now, take multiple marriages. Today, in Canada, it is illegal for three consenting adults, a man and two women, to be husband and wives. They can be husband, wife and mistress.
They also can be part of a legal contract -- in effect, a husband and two wives.
But the law cannot allow a man to marry his mistress if he has a wife, even if his faith allows it, as does Islam. Why not? Perhaps because the issue has not yet been politicized.
So what is to be done when, in a liberal democracy, morals of different groups collide? Must it always come down to politicization? It seems to me the best way out is a multiplicity of laws, to accommodate each group.
[. . . .]
"Marriage, for civil purposes, is the lawful union of two persons to the exclusion of all others," the new definition says. In other words, it allows same-sex marriages, but excludes marriage between more than two persons.
The legislation, however, affirms religious freedom by recognizing the right of all religions to marry or refuse to marry same-sex couples according to the principles of their faith.
Will multiple marriage soon be argued on these grounds?
[. . . .]
Would the solution then be using a new made-in-Canada word for same-sex marriage?
Mohamed Elmasry, a professor of computer engineering at the University of Waterloo, is national president of the Canadian Islamic Congress.
My Commentary:
***But the law cannot allow a man to marry his mistress if he has a wife, even if his faith allows it, as does Islam. Why not? Perhaps because the issue has not yet been politicized. . . . Will multiple marriage soon be argued on these grounds? ***
The slippery slope again. Coming to a court near you -- a multicultural challenge to marriage as exclusively encompassing ONE man and ONE woman. After all, one of the world's great religions thinks it is perfectly acceptable. I suppose it would make the housework burden easier. Come to think of it, ladies, what do you think? The fourth wife gets to minister to the husband's every whim; the third gets to to do the housework while the first and second wives can play kalaha*, visit the Hyde Park condo and go shopping in London. Maybe Islam could bring in a special dispensation for a fifth wife to look after the brood. Wouldn't life in Canada be heaven, then, gals?
News Junkie Canada
Note: Bold and italics are mine.
*The spelling is phonetic; I could not find it in a dictionary.
