Prophet’s Marriage to Aisha again BUT with help from our Jewish friends and the Bible this time FAO Elizabeth Mooney and Jonathan McLatchie

This is something  that I want to zone in on. It is at the back end of the EF Dawah video discussion with Elizabeth Mooney. I caught it in Jonathan McLatchie’s 4th (fourth) video in his commentary on that discussion (yes I wound up listening to a bit more of that commentary – it’s about 5 hours in total there’s no way I’m listening to it all!)

Western Secularist polemics being dressed up as “Christian”

Elizabeth Mooney states the Prophet had a 6 year old wife and then asks if that is somebody you think you should follow

Hamza Myatt states there are two schools of thought: the first being the marriage was conducted at the age of 6 and the consummation/living together began when the parents of Aisha ra deemed  her of age (the Sahih Hadith record Aisha stating her age was 9 at this time)

Hamza states the other opinion has her older and gives the figure of 13/14 at which Liz still objects to.

Let’s stick to the first one – there’s no need to consider what other opinions may or may not say. Liz wasn’t even willing to accept 13/14. I have no problems with the age in the Sahih Hadith tradition. It’s not a problem if one can contextualise and is willing to show elements of fairness and academic rigour.

What Liz is doing here is a back-projection of cultural norms in today’s West and using them unfairly to produce a polemic. To be fair to her this did not originate from her; this is sadly something that Christian missionaries and apologists pass onto their co-religionists uncritically and it spreads like wild-fire. The reality is the Prophet’s marriage to Aisha is not unBiblical and that practice in marriage would have been considered the norm in Jewish cultures at the time of Jesus (and even earlier, Moses).

I’ve written on this topic before using Prof. Geza Vermes but in short, the custom back then was to marry the girl (prior to her having come of age) and waited years till she came of age before sending her to live with her husband. It’s exactly the same as the marriage of Aisha to Muhammad p Aisha’s parents decided when she was ready to live with the Prophet after betrothal. She had been betrothed to somebody else prior to her betrothal to the Prophet showing the cultural norm taking place here.

Betrothal of minors was a Jewish norm awaiting for maturity

Standard Jewish practice at the time was the betrothal of minors – females attained maturity at the age of twelve or whenever they started to menstruate. Prof. Geza Vermes:

Quite apart from the subordinate status of women in Jewish Law, in the rabbinic era and no doubt earlier too, the bride-to-be was by definition a minor, a person not yet of age. It should be noted that in the Mishnaic-Talmudic legislation girls attained majority when they started to menstruate, or on the day after their twelfth birthday, whichever came first. In the rabbinic perspective, majority and attainment of puberty were coterminous. By the age of twelve years and six months a young woman became, in the terminology of the rabbis ‘mature’ (bogeret), and was expected already to be married. In any case, by then her father no longer had the right unilaterally to betroth her.

Now, the marriage of Aisha and Muhammad has helped Muslim jurists to form marriage laws around minors which is similar to those of our Jewish friends throughout history. Here’s Dr Jonathan Brown:

… It was most appropriate for the bride, groom and the bride’s guardian to determine the appropriate age for intercourse.

The norm that the ulama did come to consensus on was only a general guideline: they prohibited sexual intercourse for girls ‘not able to undergo it,’ on the basis that otherwise sex could be physically harmful. If the groom and his wife or her guardian disagreed about her capacity for sex, a Shariah court judge would decide, perhaps after a female expert witness examined her. This was also based on the Prophet’s marriage to Aisha. The couple had concluded the marriage contract when Aisha was only six but waited to consummate the marriage until she reached physical maturity. ..A Scottish physician resident in Aleppo in the mid 1700s noted how families endeavoured to marry their children off (i.e. complete the marriage contract) at a young age but that they would not consummate the marriage until the girl ‘had come of age”. Historical evidence from nineteenth-century Ottoman Palestine suggests that the husbands having sexual intercourse with wives before they reached puberty did sometimes occur. But it was rare, condemned socially and censured by Shariah court judges. Shariah courts in French Algeria in the 1850s considered it equally despicable. ‘Misquoting Muhammad’, Jonathan A.C Brown, Kindle p143

In fact, the Qur’ān clearly stipulates that marriage can only take place between individuals who have matured in their biological and psychological development (puberty). In reference to footnote 1 which cites Quran 4:6.

So why is this type of polemic never directed at our Jewish friends? Why don’t Christian polemicists say Judaism is false because it doesn’t conform with 21st century Western norms?

img_3461

Inconsistency: The Prophet’s marriage is not against the Bible

The inconsistency goes deeper. Prophet Muhammad’s marriage is not in opposition to the Bible; the Biblical age of consent according to Jonathan McLatchie’s colleague is puberty.

So somebody like Elizabeth Mooney is really not being helped by Christian apologists like Jon who either don’t know this or just don’t speak up.

Age of marriage is puberty according to the Bible. We have already seen Ezekiel 16 being used as a proof text by a Christian apologist to show the Biblical age of consent is puberty:

…Your breasts were formed and your hair grew, you who were naked and bare. 8 ” ‘Later I passed by, and when I looked at you and saw that you were old enough for love… [taken from Ezekiel 16]

“…Thus, we have a biblical text establishing puberty as the minimum age for marriage…” [See here for more from the Christian apologist]

In this section I will also throw in a couple of quotes of interest that I sourced from “Brother of Jesus”, a commentator on BT:

“The Bible gives us no indication as to the age of marriage for women, which would not be appreciably different from the age at which childbearing begins. However, based on the tenuous calculations of the marriage age of certain Judean kings (e.g. Josiah: age 14; Amon: 14) and the rabbinic stipulation of twelve as the minimum age of marriage for girls and thirteen for boys, an early age for marriage can be presumed (de Vaux 1961: 29). Similarly, the relatively short life spans of the ancient world, particularly in plague epochs, would lead to the conclusion that marriage took place soon after puberty, with betrothal preceding marriage perhaps by many years.” (Meyers, C. L. (1996). Procreation, Production, and Protection: Male-Female Balance in Early Israel. In Charles E. Carter & Carol L. Meyers (eds.), Community, Identity, and Ideology: Social Sciences Approaches to the Hebrew Bible. United States: Eisenbrauns. p. 507)

“The Bible gives us no information about the age at which girls are married. The practice of marrying the eldest first was not universal (Gn 29:26). On the other hand, it seems certain that girls, and therefore presumably boys too, were married very young; for centuries this has been the custom of the East, and in many places it still obtains to-day. (De Vaux, R. (1997). Ancient Israel: Its Life and Institutions (John McHugh, trans.). Grand Rapids, Michigan: Wm. B. EerdmansPublishing Co. p. 29)

Can cultural oddities be used as polemics?

Polemics like these are not only inconsistent but are actually self-refuting  as they can be applied to our great grand parents’ generation and the rest of our ancestors . Ironically, this type of argument may be applied to us (including Liz, Jon and co.) by future generations. Surely, that’s a sign of a failed argument:

Non-Muslims would serve themselves better by contemplating the Prophet’s teachings of monotheism and righteousness, and the Book he presented as God’s revelation, rather than dwelling on what is, at most, a socio-culturally historical oddity…

… In Shakespeare’s classic play Romeo and Juliet, Juliet was only thirteen, yet her mother tells her that “ladies of esteem” younger than her are already mothers.[2] According to the “Encyclopedia of Children and Childhood in History and Society,” both Christian Canon law and European civil law considered seven years as the age of consent, but judges in medieval England would approve marriages based on mutual consent at ages even lower than 7.[3] As recently as the nineteenth century, ages of consent of 13 to 14 were common in Western countries.[2] Now, we are responsible for acting in accordance with our conscience, and our own societal norms may well factor into this, but it may be a bit presumptuous to pass judgment on people of the past and future, and those of other cultures. People in the future may well look on some of our mores as bizarre. [Danesh Juyandeh]

“Is that somebody you should be following” – Liz Mooney.  Jesus according to Trinitarians allowed what???

Look, this goes beyond ages of consent. This issue of inconsistency is not only offensive to Muslims and an impediment to sincere dialogue in the Christian-Muslim discussion room but it’s  problematic as it’s setting Christians up to leave the Abrahamic tradition.

Liz found the idea of an older man even marrying a 13/14 year old problematic  and questioned following Prophet Muhammad p by asking whether one should follow a man who had such a marriage but if we extrapolate that and apply it to what Trinitarians believe about Jesus then she’s condemning the “Trinitarian Jesus” (so too are the Christian apologists and the right wing bigots who use this polemic) and is setting up a standard which will ultimately leave the one who applies that standard consistently to reject the Bible and Biblical figures.

Jesus according to Trinitarians:

~Allowed the severe beating of female slaves as long as they got up after a couple of days [Exodus 21:20]

~Ordered the killing of children, infants and WOMEN  [1 Samuel 15:3]

And seen as we have mentioned our Jewish brothers, the Christian who applies that standard consistently will end up at the door of the synagogue questioning Jews for following Moses as the Bible teaches he ordered the killing of boys and of non-virgin women [Numbers 31:17]

Why the Muslims?

The question has to be asked, why are Christian apologists  predominantly using these flawed and offensive arguments against Muslims? Come on, there has to be a reason.. right? Why aren’t they telling the Sikhs their religion is false because Guru Gobind Singh married a 12 yr old. Why aren’t they telling the Jews their religion is false because the rabbis allow sex with 12 year old girls? Why aren’t they not telling Jews about what Moses did in the OT and asking them to reject him as a Prophet?

Why not?

And closer to (their) home, why aren’t they not knocking on their co-religionists’ doors and yelling at them to stop following the Trinitarian view of Jesus as that teaches he allowed the beating of females and even the killing of children and women.

If you’re a Muslim who comes across that type of argument just stand up to it. It’s literally an internet argument that folk like the EDL use to offend Muslims – yes Tommy Robinson and co. come out with that drivel (I’m not linking Liz or Jon with that band of racists and thugs – I’m highlighting the level of the polemic!)

So why are Christian apologists using such low-level arguments? And why aren’t folk like Jon not saying hang on here folks we need to stop using inconsistent arguments to try and convert Muslims into believing in the Trinity idea?

Why not?

I say it’s because there’s a load of group-think and herd mentality taking place in Christian apologetics (to Muslims) right now and nobody is willing to go against the grain and start calling inconsistent arguments (and those based on total fabrications) out. They allow these arguments to fester and spread amongst their apologetics and missionary communities. They tell us they have the Holy Spirit but I just don’t see anything holy in these arguments.These arguments are unholy – they are intellectually dishonest, inconsistent, offensive, unChristian and unBiblical.

I know Jon’s friend has recently rebuked James White for inconsistency, nasty treatment of Christians and arrogance despite having bit his tongue for years (indicating just how difficult it is for a Christian apologist to go against the grain and speak out against obviously problematic behaviour amongst Christian apologists).

Folks, don’t you not see how self-refuting your argumentation style actually is? You say you have the Holy Spirit and you want us to believe you yet we see the offensive and inconsistent arguments you allow to spread and propagate. Self refutation.

Message to Jonathan McLatchie

You had an ideal opportunity to say: hold on, this argument is invalid, it’s offensive, unfair and it will lead to Christians leaving Christianity if it is applied consistently. Why did you not say such? Ask yourself…

There was a segment where David Wood was being championed by one or more of your (Jon’s) colleagues, Wood is the guy who plagiarised an Islamophobic  Coptic Christian priest and spread the sex with a dead body lie. He’s the same bloke who totally misunderstood the Arabic and claimed Prophet Muhammad was a cross-dresser (in the process he actually wore his wife’s nightwear on camera contravening the Biblical law against crossdressing), not to mention the thighing hoax amongst other such claims. anybody who looks at David Wood’s (as well as Jay Smith’s) arguments critically will see the inconsistencies and how they arm Christians with standards that will inevitably mean the consistent will leave Christianity

I don’t understand why Muslims are still waiting for a Christian who claims to have the Holy Spirit to actually speak up and clean up the offensive  polemics that are rampant in Christian apologetics. You know about the Trinity channel you work with – they’ve  had Christians on there wanting to nuke Muslims or use Iraq to have a proxy war with Iran nevermind firing wild-eyed polemics at Muslims. Perhaps them just showing us “love”?

Hmm, I know Christians talk big about love but I don’t see it coming from Christian apologists towards Muslims. Or perhaps love is redefined as trying to get young Muslims to cower in corners, belittlement, mockery and slanders when it comes to dealing with Muslims.

Can we have a Christian, PLEASE, who is sincere and courageous enough to clean Christian polemics up and regulate Christian apologists/polemicists a little. Please…

Advertisements


Categories: Islam

26 replies

  1. Just a note on the issue of Mary-Joseph re the Catholic sources. Muslims need to be careful when citing Catholic opinions on the ages of the two as from a scholar who was talking about Christian imagery there was an emphasis amongst the Catholics to deliberately portray Joseph as really old so as to give the image that the marriage was one without consummation due to his old age. This is for Catholic theological reasons – perpetual virginity.

    Interestingly enough, today, at the church I visited the reverend focussed his sermon on Mary and he did say she would have either been 16 or less – so he wasn’t trying to offer a Westernized version.

    But here’s what Prof. Geza Vermes wrote on this subject:

    Once the preliminary requirements laid down in the agreement of betrothal were satisfied, nuptials followed: they were presumed to take place within twelve months from the date of agreement. Then the bridegroom led his bride to his own home amid solemn festivities attended by family, friends and neighbours. The Gospels contain various parables about Jewish weddings (see for example Mt 25:1-13). It would follow from these rules, which appear standard and long standing, and not some kind of innovation by the redactors of the Mishnah, that at the time of the incidents described in the Gospels of Matthew and Luke, Mary was no more than twelve years old or conceivably a little less, and by the standards of her society and age, mature enough for marriage

    Like

  2. Note to Jon. Jay Smith has gone quiet on this, he did email me saying he will look for the footage but quite some time has passed since then. I am sue you understand the serious nature of these claims, please do contact him to either come out and apologise and retract those claims about the Muslims at Speakers corner or provide the footage (seen as that type of footage would go viral within minutes of uploading one wonders why he doesn’t have it uploaded and is now seemingly unable to produce the footage)

    https://bloggingtheology.net/2016/11/24/jonathan-mclatchie-please-ask-pfander-films-to-provide-evidence-for-this-shocking-claim/

    Like

  3. Prepubescent marriages were very common. In fact the Bible informs us that Moses and his men married prepubescent girls:

    https://discover-the-truth.com/2016/08/07/a-detailed-historical-examination-of-numbers-3118/

    Now whether this very is historically true is another matter.

    Mary was believed to 12 when she was married off. This is stated by a lot of early Church fathers:

    https://discover-the-truth.com/2013/09/30/marriage-of-mary-to-joseph-the-carpenter/

    Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, it states:
    “One might counter that the expression mohar habbetulot (Ex. 22:16[17]) refers rather to the pretium virginitatis. In this case, the mohar would be compensation to the girl for the loss of her virginity. This explanation, however, is unacceptable, since it proceeds on the assumption that the term betula means ‘virgin.’ This may doubtlessly be the case in many passages, but in joel 1:8, betula thus refers to a married woman who had been ‘possessed’ by her husband (ba’al); betula thus refers to a marriageable girl who was physically able to cope with a man, ‘taking her into his possession.’ Here the term betula says nothing about her virginity. Ex.22:16 (17) (kesep yisqol kemohar hab betulot) can thus be translated ‘he shall weigh out as much silver as is required for marriageable girls.’ In this context we should point out that ancient Hebrew custom did not associate marriageability with puberty. In contrast to the marriageable girl (betula), the…. Alma refers to a girl in puberty capable of conception. GIRLS COULD IN FACT ALREADY BE GIVEN MARRIAGE LONG BEFORE ACTUAL PHYSICAL MATURITY, PERHAPS EVEN AS YOUNG AS FIVE YEARS OLD (CF. LEV. 27:5), AND IT DID HAPPEN THAT MARRIAGES WERE ALREADY CONSUMMATED WITH PREPUBESCENT GIRLS. (Theological Dictionary of the Old Testament, [edited by G. Johannes Botterweck, Helmer Ringgren, Heinz-Josef Fabry 1997], volume 8, page 144 – 145

    Don’t forget Isaac’s marriage to Rebbeca when she was 7-10 according to the Bible:

    https://discover-the-truth.com/2016/10/26/the-age-of-rebecca-when-she-married-isaac-biblical-perceptive/

    Christian missionaries shouldnt have issue given the fact that many of those who are looked up to in the Bible engaged in similar marriages in ancient of times. If God of the Bible didnt say anything against it, who are you to judge????

    Liked by 1 person

  4. “Western Secularist polemics being dressed up as “Christian”
    This statement needs to be written by a golden ink. It really describes most arguments given by polemic christians against Islam. They use the western secular background to attack Islam while their own bible has nothing to do with that background. No wonder that Jesus will condemn them for they reject the law of God.

    I told this before, and I’m telling it right now: The main objection against Islam given by christians in the next 5-10 years will be that Islam prohibits the Same -sex marriage. Just wait till this “marriage” gets christianized !

    Liked by 1 person

    • I really wouldn’t be surprised. In fact academics are talking about polygamy being the next move for Western secularism which will be interesting as I’m sure the churches in the West will begin to cite Luther to claim the Bible doesn’t prohibit polygamy.

      Of course when they talk about polygamy being the next “frontier” for the “Christian” West (yep, people like Smith and co. will try to impress the Muslim by thinking the West is Christian) is that of polyandry and polygyny (and not both separately!).

      But hey, for now I guess they want us to overlook the abortion, gay marriage and rampant sex-before marriage whilst they impress the Muslim with the West being “Christian”.

      The sad thing is, ?I don;t think the average Christian missionary and apologist even thinks about all this stuff – if they did they wouldn’t argue the way they do.

      Like

    • This type of marriage is on its way to being “Christianized” here by the Church of England and others have gone further:

      More Christians who are involved in the CoE believe gay marriage is right rather than wrong. A recent survey by YouGov suggested 45% of Church of England followers felt same-sex marriage was right, against 37% who believed it wrong [stats sourced from Huffington Post]. According to the Huff Post, the Episcopal Church, the United Church of Christ and now the Presbytarian Church (USA) sanctify the marriage of two men or two women.

      And for us Muslims, the church will not even make a bit of noise to prevent the hijab from being banned in certain Western countries.They love the secularists – these are their own but the Muslims are seen as foreign and the other (still).

      Like

    • I think br Kaleef should write about this subject and record how christians have justified any dominant culture in which they live, and how they make it the standard for their ethics such as idols, slavery,and killing others.

      Like

  5. Thanks.

    Geza Vermes states twelve or a little less for the age of Mary and this would have been a cultural norm at the time.

    As for Moses’ men – I’m sure they would have waited for the girls to come of age before consummation too.

    One thing that comes out of the wash is that our Christian friends are afraid to apply the same low level arguments against the Jews and the OT. I wonder why? Is being called anti-semitic more hurtful than being called Islamophobic? I guess we need to learn more from our Jewish friends. Next time I’m chatting with rabbi Singer I may just ask him why the evangelical Christian polemicists don’t come at them with low level polemics like the evangelicals do with us.

    You’d think they would bang on about Numbers 31 and what Moses is purported to have done.

    Not a peep from them.

    .

    Like

  6. There’s a conspicuous lack of solid evidence for the claims made in this article from the point of view of the bible. I don’t see anything but conjecture.

    Jewish opinions, which are biased anyway, don’t count for anything in my eyes.

    The islamic polemics we see here seem to confuse the onset of puberty with it’s completion.

    How old was Mohammed again when he first started lusting after a six year old girl who was playing with her dolls?

    Like

    • “Jewish opinions, which are biased anyway, don’t count for anything in my eyes.”

      or, one might put it this way:

      ‘Christian opinions, which are biased anyway, don’t count for anything in my eyes.’

      It never ceases to amaze me how easily Christians slip into anti-Semitism when they are cornered.

      Liked by 2 people

    • Christians go crazy when they are cornered.

      Liked by 2 people

    • You are right it is conjecture because his evidence was lifted straight out of the bible which is falsehood and conjecture.

      Irony just died.

      Liked by 2 people

    • madmanna,
      Considering the Bible is used by a CHRISTIAN apologist to show the Biblical age of consent is puberty it should tell you this is not about Jewish opinion.

      A shed load of Christian opinion is cited as these communities were in fact CHRISTIAN:

      According to the “Encyclopedia of Children and Childhood in History and Society,” both Christian Canon law and European civil law considered seven years as the age of consent, but judges in medieval England would approve marriages based on mutual consent at ages even lower than 7

      The Prophet wasn’t “lusting”. The idea of marrying Aisha was proposed by somebody else.

      And in any case, what is wrong with looking at what the Jews say about THEIR own culture (and the culture of Jesus). Shouldn’t they not at least know what their marital norms have been over the centuries? Or do they have to wait for a Western secularist to pop over and talk down to them whilst revising or “reforming” their identity and history?

      And, the rabbis clearly teach the marriage of Prophet Muhammad to Aisha is in accordance with their customs (customs which Jesus saw but never spoke out against, interesting eh..). BUT the big question here is why aren’t the EDL,other Islamophobes and the Christian apologists not banging on Jewish doors to tell them their religion is evil and that they follow paedophilia?

      If you really want to talk about Chrisianity how about you talk about:

      Jesus according to Trinitarians:

      ~Allowed the severe beating of female slaves as long as they got up after a couple of days [Exodus 21:20]

      ~Ordered the killing of children, infants and WOMEN [1 Samuel 15:3]

      And seen as we have mentioned our Jewish brothers, the Christian who applies that standard consistently will end up at the door of the synagogue questioning Jews for following Moses as the Bible teaches he ordered the killing of boys and of non-virgin women [Numbers 31:17]

      —-

      I think some Christians may find it difficult to see Muslims not willing to cower in the corner and feel intimidated by low level internet polemics against Islam. If you’re that such person then you’re not exactly Mr. Sincerity.

      Liked by 3 people

    • Would you like to tell us Madmanna, where in the Bible it states the age number for someone allowed to be married?

      Liked by 1 person

  7. that was the norm back in the times of early biblical history and also Prophet’s (p) day… its not the norm in this day and age… nowhere is it articulated or commanded that muslims must marry their daughters from the outset of puberty…. the norm on these issues or examples back in the prophet’s (p) day is a rarity, an exception in our times….

    Like

  8. Islamophobes cannot distinguish between the Sunnah of the Prophet and the biography (Seerah) of the Prophet. The fact that Prophet Muhammad marriage Aisha at that age is NOT part of the Sunnah but the biography, Likewise, the angry statements of Jesus rebuking the Pharisees in Matthew 23 is part of Jesus’ biography, not the actual teachings that Christians have to follow. Indeed, not every hadith is sunnah though all sunnah belongs to the hadith. This was something normal and acceptable back then because the standards and culture was completely different from our modern-day globalized world. Centuries ago the female child would become a woman at puberty (the age of maturity) because no “teenage years” (adolescence) existed back then. Indeed, the male and female would attain physical and mental maturity at ages that would be considered young today. It is significant that NOBODY objected to the Prophet’s marriage with Aisha, it was something normal in the seventh century world. The charge of pedophilia came centuries later, but nobody accuses the Prophet of being a pedophile in the Quran or worshipping a moon god. Those are later fabricated charges.

    Christian Islamophobes need to stop projecting their own Western standards and judgements unto the Islamic texts, They are grossly manipulating the texts and channelling the Islamic sources through a contemporary Western lens, disregarding the Islamic lens. They forge their own conclusions about the surface layer readings (the outward text) without any regards for the levels of meaning underneath. Indeed, that is analogous to drilling a hole at the bottom of a ship to get water directly instead of asking the people on the upper deck. Due to the enormity of what is happening today it is necessary for Muslim apologists to give them a good taste of their own medicine. I agree harsh polemics needs to be used sometimes, Christian hatemongers like David Wood plays games with Islamic scripture, handling the Quran like a toy.

    By the way, everyone needs to watch this video:

    Like

    • well said 🙂

      Like

    • Only 200 years ago the life expectancy of a woman was 10 to 18 years less than the average age of menopause.

      To suggest mature women who lived many centuries ago ought to have married according to the standards of today’s sexually confused and increasingly decadent generation wasting many of their precious childbearing years in the process is just silly.

      Liked by 1 person

  9. I wanted to reply to the article, and comment on this tired Islamophobic argument. Oops.

    Like

  10. Salaam all

    One of things that we Muslims don’t point out is that actually “west” doesn’t have any issues with minors [whatever this word might mean] having sex. West only have problem when a “minor” has sex with an “adult”.

    For example if a 9 year old girl has sex with a 10 year boy [ or vice versa], it is completely legal in most jurisdictions. it is only when a minor say , “14” year old, has sex with an adult, say “19” year old , that the act becomes illegal in most jurisdictions.

    For example in Canada [not picking on canada but just giving an example] . Just see this section from the link provided below.

    “Are there any exceptions to this?

    The Criminal Code provides “close in age” or “peer group” exceptions.

    For example, a 14 or 15 year old can consent to sexual activity with a partner as long as the partner is less than five years older and there is no relationship of trust, authority or dependency or any other exploitation of the young person. This means that if the partner is 5 years or older than the 14 or 15 year old, any sexual activity will be considered a criminal offence. There is a narrow exception for couples who were married before 2015, and one of the spouses was under the age of 16 at the time of the marriage.

    There is also a “closeinage” exception for 12 and 13 year olds: a 12 or 13 year old can consent to sexual activity with another young person who is less than two years older and with whom there is no relationship of trust, authority or dependency or other exploitation of the young person.”

    http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/rp-pr/other-autre/clp/faq.html

    So the main thing to understand here is that it is not the “sexual activities” of the minors that west has problem with, rather the main reason given is “exploitation”. So the question that we need to ask is if we , as society, “ensure” e.g provide legal means to make sure there is no “exploitation”, does it not mean that the act should be declared “legal” based on the very same reasoning? Why is it not ok for a 12 year old to marry and have sex within marriage [which is currently ILLEGAL though LEGAL in all religions] rather than have sex outside of marriage which is LEGAL in law but SIN in religions?

    After all on what basis would the marriage of 14 year old to a 19 year old be declared illegal. if both sides are happy, able to give consent, parents, judge, law enforcement and society at large has ensured that there is no exploitation, then why not make that legal? So may be wherever minors are involved , there could be institution of some extra legal requirements such as obtaining the marriage license only after a review and permission by a judge.

    All the problem that is feared with minor-adult sexual relationship can happen within minor-minor sexual activities too e.g be it STD, injury due to penetration, pregnancy, etc these risks are present in both cases.

    Also in all species of animal kingdom sexual activities happen starting with onset of puberty. Why not apply this on humans as well? remember that one of the arguments to legalize same sex union in west was that such is also found in animal kingdom!

    Now i am not advocating child marriage. i am only questioning the basis that is used to legalize or criminalize certain behavior?

    Liked by 1 person

  11. “Would you like to tell us Madmanna, where in the Bible it states the age number for someone allowed to be married?”

    Flying Pir,

    The bible doesn’t give us definite ages because I believe, among other reasons, sexual development doesn’t rigidly follow a certain timeline.

    The bible gives guidance from certain verses, as alluded to in the article:

    “Age of marriage is puberty according to the Bible. We have already seen Ezekiel 16 being used as a proof text by a Christian apologist to show the Biblical age of consent is puberty:

    …Your breasts were formed and your hair grew, you who were naked and bare. 8 ” ‘Later I passed by, and when I looked at you and saw that you were old enough for love… [taken from Ezekiel 16]”

    The forming of the breasts takes years. When Muslims say puberty is reached do they mean after all changes are finished or do they mean the onset of puberty?

    Does Sharia law set any limit on the allowable age difference involving a marriage relation between a prepubescent girl and a man?

    “The Quranic verse 4:6 says that marriage is only deemed acceptable by God when one has hit puberty, and physically mentally mature. There are many tafsirs for 4:6 added in the following link,”

    4 v 6 has nothing to do with marriage.

    Sharia allows marriage with pre-pubescent girls because a waiting period has to be adhered to for them also:

    ““And for such of your women as despair of menstruation, if ye doubt, their period (of waiting) shall be three months, along with those who have it not”

    [al-Talaaq 65:4].

    Al-Sa‘di (may Allah have mercy on him) said: “along with those who have it [menses] not” means minors, those who have not yet started to menstruate.

    A waiting period is only necessary for those females who have had sexual relations with their husband. Not those who are divorced or widowed before.

    “However, based on the tenuous calculations of the marriage age of certain Judean kings (e.g. Josiah: age 14; Amon: 14) and the rabbinic stipulation of twelve as the minimum age of marriage for girls and thirteen for boys, an early age for marriage can be presumed (de Vaux 1961: 29). ”

    I personally see no problem with 14 for Josiah as this age can be calculated as a reasonable possibility from the text. As long as his wife is around the same age.

    Like

  12. Of course Josiah’s wife could have been older than him which makes Josaiah’s age a non-sequiter.

    Like

  13. “The bible doesn’t give us definite ages because I believe, among other reasons, sexual development doesn’t rigidly follow a certain timeline.”

    why did christians in the uk marry their daughters of at 12 years of age?

    http://www.medievaltimes.com/teachers-students/materials/medieval-era/marriage.html

    Like

Please leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: