11th February 2008

“The Department for Work and Pensions recently made an astonishing decision to pay state benefits to Muslim men for each of their wives, as long as the marriages were contracted legally abroad. Bigamy is illegal in Britain and the spectacle of the Government colluding in the practice of polygyny – not polygamy, for Muslim women cannot have four husbands – is a signal that ministers are losing their moral compass on the subject of women's rights.”

Joan Smith

9 Responses to “11th February 2008”

  1. Chris Says:

    Rub-a-duck. It’s the end of the world as we know it. Come on world, wake the fuck up! Yeah, not feeling eloquent.

  2. Terence Meaden Says:

    This is a matter that should have been raised in Parliament BEFORE any action was taken.
    Now it is a matter that has to be raised in Parliament with a view to repeal, not least because there has never been any statutory declaration about such matters.
    Britain believes in a secular state, albeit one that developed, for all its barbaric Medieval periods and practices, in conjunction with principles said to be of the Judeo-Christian tradition; yet no-one these days expects Britons to subscribe to the creeds and brutish laws dating from the time of Moses and Jesus. British institutions have separated church and state (although not unfortunately faith and schools). In this condition the institutions are able to include the enlightened people who have avoided the cerebral irrationalities of unproven faiths besides the unfortunates who got their brains loaded with the heavy burden of illogical crazy faith.
    In short, the British system believes in the rule of law. It is the result of successive judgments of common law and judicial experience over many centuries that have brought true and loyal British citizens to enjoy the benefits of the modern law they have now.
    Yet another horror is that of Muslim inbreeding, particularly among Pakistani immigrants who practice first-cousin marriages. The newspapers yesterday were explaining that, as a result of inbreeding, ONE THIRD of all defective births in Britain arise among Muslims who nonetheless only make up 2.7% of the population.

  3. Nefari Says:

    Just to clarify the various -mys:

    bigamy: the crime of marrying while one has a wife or husband still living, from whom no valid divorce has been effected. (apparently the crime is illegal in Britain. convenient)

    polygyny: the practice or condition of having more than one wife at one time.

    polygamy: the practice or condition of having more than one spouse, esp. wife, at one time.

    Thank you Dictionary.com.

    Hrm… looks like Muslim law might be sexist in this case.

  4. Terence Meaden Says:

    The law of Islam-Submission is entirely sexist in all cases. It seems to be in favour of men because the religion was invented by a visionary epileptic in a patriarchal desert-tribal environment who wanted wives and who wanted control over them.
    A Muslim can divorce a wife by saying, whenever he wants, three times “I divorce you”. On the other hand, a woman has to go to a religious court accompanied by four men who will support her plea that a divorce is the best thing for her. In other court actions her testimony is worth no more than half that of a man
    . . . . and there is so much more about the inequality of the sexes.

  5. Terence Meaden Says:

    “The price of liberty”, said Jefferson “is eternal vigilance”.

    “Rationalists are fighting darkness and religious bigotry from every direction. The politicians are only concerned with the votes that they will get or lose at the next election.” GTM

  6. Chris Says:

    I’ve heard Christopher Hitchens rail on against Prince Charles many times, his chief complaint seeming to be that Chuck is on the verge of converting to Islam-Submission (TM – I like the hyphenated form and will endeavor to use it often). Can anyone shed any light on why CH says this? Scary thought if true but kind of hard for me to imagine that the next head of the Church of England would actually even contemplate this.

  7. Terence Meaden Says:

    Chuck says he is a believer in faith.
    Indeed, on British coins is the Latin (in abbreviated from) for “Defender of the Faith”–by which is meant ‘the faith’ as viewed by the Church of England. At coronations the new rex or regina swear to uphold this; but Chuck said, some 30/40 years ago, that he wanted to be regarded as “Defender of Faith”. The percentage of muslims in Britain was then something like 0.5%.
    No, he will not submit to Islam-Submission as the religion of his god in the sky, but he is a gardener and wants to be friendly with the creeping vine.

    As for Islam, it translates as ‘submission’, so if we were all talking Arabic and thinking Arabic we would hear the equivalent of thr word ‘Submission’ every time. Therefore, why do we not speak of the religion called “Submission” instead of saying Islam? This is why I try to remember to write “Islam-Submission” instead if Islam.


  8. Chris Says:

    Creeping vines are pretty to look at but when they start tearing bricks off your house it’s time to break out the RoundUp. Thanks for the clarification. I knew the translation of Islam but it hadn’t occured to me to tie a rope around it and parade it’s true nature. It’s temping to simply say “Submission” and when you get a quizzical look, to explain. It’s long past time that the civilized world, that is to say those that don’t relish the idea of living in a fourteenth century caliphate, push the islamofascists back into their yard.

  9. Critic Says:

    While the islamofascists are paramount in current affairs, lets not forget the religiofascists that permeate western society.

    While they are at present not committing obvious heinous crimes against humanity (unless you consider the poisoning of children’s minds heinous – which I do), their time will come.